# More cycle routes needed for Vancouver?



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

The dedicated cycle lanes in downtown Vancouver are only a start; we need to have more dedicated lanes all over the lower mainland.

Just look at what they are doing in Copenhagen, Denmark:

Denmark opens first cycle highway for commuters in Copenhagen - Xinhua | English.news.cn

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/w...to-work-on-a-superhighway.html?pagewanted=all

I suggest we take a whole lane of Cambie street from downtown Vancouver and run it as a dedicated bike lane all the way to Richmond following the Canada Line.  And why stop there? Take out a lane of Hastings and run it east-west linking downtown Vancouver and Burnaby, a lane on Broadway... etc., etc...


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

You're joking right? You can already ride your bike there, you don't need to take a lane away from commuting traffic. 

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

I hope you're joking. BTW, every single cyclist was NOT wearing a helmet. I guess concussion and brain damage wins out over "helmet hair".

My friend Milton, one of the best cyclist I know, once crashed his bike and got a bad concussion (kept repeating the same question every 30 seconds). He had a hard shell helmet on that cracked in half. He wasn't even going that fast but his quick-release malfunctioned and down he went, head first into the pavement. He'd be dead or brain damaged if it wasn't for the helmet. 

So it really POs me to see all the cyclists on Lower Mainland streets NOT wearing helmets and breaking the law. If they crash and crack open their heads, maybe some of them will finally get the message that helmets are to protect their brains, but they probably won't. I know I can go the whole day without seeing a single helmet on a cyclist.

I used to cycle 7 days a week, from my parents' place at 41st & Knight out to UBC and back, as well as down to my church at 5 Rd & Blundell in Richmond. I always wore my helmet and most cyclists did as well. Now, very few cyclists do.


----------



## djamm (Sep 25, 2010)

I personally favor bike lines and such where there is the excess space, transit and traffic infrastructure to handle excess loads caused by removing traffic lanes.

If the city insists on making bike lanes, then bump up the transit system to make it much more effective like much of Europe. Don't, suddenly remove traffic lanes without the transit system to handle it. 

Currently, our city has some of the worst traffic issues already in North America...Lets not keep making it worse with pure ideology. 

It seems to me they need to start having licenses and insurance on cycles too. Just like cars, motorcycles, and even my dog is licensed. I find some of these battery powered cycles to be a real problem. People drive them like they are a motorcycle, yet they can not drive close to the posted speed. I find them much worse than the 10 speed or hybrid commuter bikes. Some of these battery powered bikes look like mopeds or scooters....but seem much less safe, without any license or insurance.

my two bits...


----------



## josephl (Apr 21, 2010)

SeaHorse_Fanatic said:


> I hope you're joking. BTW, every single cyclist was NOT wearing a helmet. I guess concussion and brain damage wins out over "helmet hair".
> 
> My friend Milton, one of the best cyclist I know, once crashed his bike and got a bad concussion (kept repeating the same question every 30 seconds). He had a hard shell helmet on that cracked in half. He wasn't even going that fast but his quick-release malfunctioned and down he went, head first into the pavement. He'd be dead or brain damaged if it wasn't for the helmet.
> 
> ...


I ride my bike a lot and I am totally PO'ed by cyclist who don't wear helmuts, who ride on the side walk and who don't obey traffic rules, and don't even get me started on the people who buy underpowered scooters that are too slow for the main road so ride on the bike path instead.

My 2 cent red neck solution that will never be implemented in my lifetime is:

1 Cops be given a monthly quota of helmetless riders to ticket, just like speeding tickets(yes, I know, the quote dosen't exist) 
2 A law be passed that any adult in an accident, whether minor or major, be denied medical care should they be helmetless.....I know, pipe dream but hey, I want an entire acrylic floor built in my house so I can have a 1,000 sq ft custom discus tank too :bigsmile:


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

josephl said:


> I ride my bike a lot and I am totally PO'ed by cyclist who don't wear helmuts, who ride on the side walk and who don't obey traffic rules, and don't even get me started on the people who buy underpowered scooters that are too slow for the main road so ride on the bike path instead.
> 
> My 2 cent red neck solution that will never be implemented in my lifetime is:
> 
> ...


Yup, I agree that just as your car insurance is void if you're breaking the law behind the wheel, then an adult cyclist who chooses NOT to wear a helmet should have some consequence to their decision to break the law and ride their bikes.


----------



## J'sRacing (Apr 25, 2012)

stratos said:


> The dedicated cycle lanes in downtown Vancouver are only a start; we need to have more dedicated lanes all over the lower mainland.
> 
> Just look at what they are doing in Copenhagen, Denmark:
> 
> ...


I really hope you're kidding, or give me some of what ever you've been smoking. Despite whatever travel agent/ immigration agent told you, Canada is NOT a HIPPY LAND. 
Look at all the mess created by adding a bike lane to the viaduct. 
Don't get me wrong, i enjoy cycling, i was at stanley park twice this month for the route along the seawall. But cycling should be just that: a form of entertainment, not a form of transportation. This isn't the freaking 80s. 
And i must stress this point over and over again, cyclist should be forced to buy insurance, and obey traffic laws. 99.99999999999% of the cyclists i see don't obey the laws. But if i hit them i'd have to pay my own deductible. How ridiculous is that?

PS the only "bike" i'd ever ride on the road would be a gas chugging sport bike.


----------



## tony1928 (Apr 22, 2010)

I love cycling recreationally but I don't believe cycling is any substitute for proper transit, roadways, and traffic management in Vancouver. Cycling should be complementary to existing forms of mass transit but can't be expected to solve all our transportation woes as Gregor likes to think that it will.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

In an area where it rains for most of the year, only a handful of die-hard cyclists actually cycle for more than a few months a year. I know this because I used to be one. Most cyclists, recreational and commuters, are more fair-weather cyclists than "lets cycle in the rain" types.

I'm guessing the OP thought things were too quiet on BCA for the last couple of weeks so he had to throw a bone out to the pack and see how much blood would get splattered from the feeding frenzy.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

Geez, got more reaction than posting up some free guppies. 

I cycle a lot, as in 5,000 -10,000+ km year. My work commute is 12 km each way and I try to do it a minimum 100+ times a year. I lived in Denmark for years and know a cycling lifestyle can work if people are willing to embrace it. How many of you actually read the links I posted? I will post them again because they are worth reading:

Denmark opens first cycle highway for commuters in Copenhagen - Xinhua | English.news.cn

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/w...rk-on-a-superhighway.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

I am old enough to remember when "everyone" in China used to cycle. I have fond memories of those television images of everyone cycling in Beijing. Now the air is so clogged there people gag.

I notice we all wring our hands over increasing acidification of the oceans, man made climate change, ground level urban ozone pollution - all attributable to automobile use - yet people freak out when "pushed" by the state to start cycling. Don't be lazy! The world's environment is going to hell because people are not willing to change their destructive lifestyle habits. Be proactive, be part of the solution.

And yes, we need way more public transit...and perhaps elevated light rail could run above the new dedicated cycle lanes I envision for our city.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

To follow on my last post, here is a short excerpt from the NYT article:



> In Denmark, thanks to measures like the (cycling) superhighway, commuters choose bicycles because they are the fastest and most convenient transportation option. "It's not because the Danes are more environmentally friendly," said Gil Penalosa, executive director of 8-80 Cities, a Canadian organization that works to make cities healthier. "It's not because they eat something different at breakfast."
> 
> Lars Gemzo, a partner at Gehl Architects, said that within Copenhagen, biking was already the best option for many kinds of trips. "If you want to drive a car for a medium distance, you know you are a fool," he said. "You are going to waste time."
> 
> ...


The key point here is that cycling has to become the more efficient and cheaper form of transportation before people will embrace it over automobiles. Thus, I say we dedicate more lanes in Vancouver to cycles and impose road tolls for cars too! When it costs someone $10-20 to cross into downtown Vancouver by car you'll see many people take up cycling.  And in the process we all get healthier and happier, thereby saving ourselves public heath care $$$. It makes sense on many levels to promote cycling by discouraging car use through public policy tools.


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

How dare you accuse me of being lazy, and how dare you suggest I ride a bike to vancouver... It's 45 km... i'm glad there is one person that agrees with Gregor but I still think he's a nutbar. I have to drive downtown for my job... The bike lanes are rediculous. You could always ride a bike where the bike lanes are, it makes absolutely no sense to me why they would spend money on such a useless endevour... Now I cant make a right turn when I need to and that adds time to my day, time I could spend at home with my kids and wife snd tanks.......... Lazy... Sorry the bike lanes pss me off... 

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

We are all "lazy" and unimaginative, that is the problem.

If we had light rail running from Surrey to Vancouver, you could hop on with your bike, get off at a terminus near one of the bridges and ride downtown; or better yet, we build a dedicated light rail bridge under/near the Granville St. bridge across False Creek to the foot of Pacific Blvd., then you would disembark there and continue by bus or cycle.

Use your imagination, support positive change.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

> Use your imagination, support positive change.


Here's another idea: Lobby the federal/provincial government for a requirement that ALL employees in any industry be permitted to telecommute at least part time unless their job requires them to be physically present all the time, or unless there is another valid reason for them not to do so. That would instantly cut at least 30% of the commuter traffic on the roads, cut down pollution and generate a lot more goodwill than just throwing up roadblocks to driving. It would also cost a LOT less. It would also mean that people were working in their neighborhoods and had more time with their families, all things that contribute positively to strong communities.

Comparing Vancouver to Copenhagen is ridiculous. Copenhagen is FLAT and compact. Vancouver has these things called hills, or mountains if you're on the North Shore, plus urban sprawl and obscene housing costs which forces people out of the city. I used to bike from Deer Lake to downtown, and many bike routes around the lower mainland can be pretty daunting for a beginner. I'm pretty fit and there were some hills on that ride which could be challenging. Also, most bike trips in Copenhagen are a lot shorter than your average Vancouver commute. It's one thing to ride 2-7km, quite another to ride 20-50km. Most trips commuters are traveling at least 20km. A lot of the cars coming into Vancouver come from outside the city proper where cycling is not practical and where there is no transit. Want to tell all those folks to cycle to work? Good luck.

The bike vs. car debate seems to be like the work outside the home/stay at home parent debate - instant warfare. I think a lot of people who are pro-everyone-should-be-cyclists in the Vancouver area fail to see the very real barriers that face the people who can't commute by bike. I know most cyclists think that everyone can commute by bike if they just try, but that's not actually true. Physical fitness, time, distance weather and other responsibilities all play a large part in this. The bald truth is that you cannot force people to cycle while they have an alternative that works better for them. It's like trying to force religious conversion, and that's how Gregor and the Vision council are going about this. In doing so, they're creating far more backlash and resistance than if they had sat down with all parties involved and said "we want to support alternative transportation, what do people want and what is the most effective way to do it?" instead of "bikes good, car bad!" and trying to shove their agenda down everyone's throats.

Barrier #1: Distance from work. And for the people saying "well, move closer in", this has been pointed out already, but your average to lower income family can't afford to live in even the inner ring suburbs (Burnaby, North Shore, Tri-Cities), let alone Vancouver, due to ridiculous housing costs. If you're single or a couple, a basement apartment or $1000 for a one or two bedroom might work for you. Not so great if you have 2 kids or pets, if you can even find a place (ever counted the kid and pet restricted rentals in Vancouver?). If you're living in Maple Ridge, Langley or Surrey and working in that inner ring, it's going to take you up to 2 hours to get to and from work. That's time that people don't have.

Barrier #2: Physical ability. Lots of people physically can't cycle the distance or terrain to their workplace. There is also the fact that people trip chain. If you pick up the kids, the groceries and run errands on your way home, that adds maybe an extra 5-10k to your trip, plus a load that you can't haul in your bike.

Barrier #3: Safety. Probably one of the biggest issues. Safe cycling routes are a good thing, but there just aren't safe routes from where most drivers are coming from. Yeah, bike lanes are nice IN THE CITY, but what happens if you have to come from somewhere out highway 1? The moral high ground doesn't do you any good when you're dead or injured.

Barrier #4: Time. I used to commute by bike from Burnaby to downtown Vancouver. Took me about 65 minutes, and I quit for the winter when it got dark and rainy for safety and comfort reasons. I lived in Maple Ridge for 6 years, and it would have taken me over 2.5 hours one way to commute to Vancouver, time that I didn't have due to trivial things like having to earn a living and take care of family. I took the West Coast Express and loved it, and let me tell you, I am a HUGE supporter of Rail for the Valley, who are working to bring similar service to the south side of the river. The money spent on Gateway would have built light rail from Chilliwack to Vancouver, plus an interurban network in Surrey and Langley.

Barrier #5: Weather. No, you won't melt if you get wet. However, in Metro Vancouver, you will get *very* cold and dirty and miserable. I've lived this. Add to that the fact that most workplaces don't have shower or change facilities, plus time to change and if you need to arrive clean and presentable for work, this is a dealbreaker.

Increasing cycling is a good thing, but if we are really serious about facing the transport challenges and peak oil, we need to invest seriously in *region wide* public transportation. Forget building roads and 10 blocks of bike lanes. We need to reinstate the interurban rail service out the valley as a viable alternative to driving from Chilliwack, Langley or Surrey. We need the Evergreen line from the Tri-Cities. We need Translink to get their heads out of their butts and become an elected body again rather than a bloated sinecure for failed politicians. And most of all, we need to enshrine in employment law the ability to telecommute where job duties permit. That would quite likely take 30%-40% of the regular commuters off our roads at least part time. There is no reason for most knowledge workers to have to work at a distant office, and many many jobs can be done easily from home. The big barrier to this is the dinosaur management who value face time over productivity.

You want to think big and encourage cycling? Start by lobbying all levels of government about eliminating the urban sprawl caused by uncontrolled, unplanned development. Rezone existing communities to allow work/live housing and get rid of the miles of strip malls that you have to drive to and from. Build homes and workplaces around transit hubs. When people spend more time in a smaller area, cycling and walking makes more sense.


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

Roadways are bike lanes imo, however i do like how they add bike lanes along the side of roads. They dont take up viable space from traffic and they are low cost to maintain. Rather than cut car traffic lanes i think a better system needs to be established via the use of greenways already existing. Gives a much better environment to cyclists and can be used to bypass congested routes.

Where transit is concerned, cycling is a great way to make up for shortfalls in service. It can greatly reduce wait times and allow you to get to the earlier buses out in the suburbs. Aleady you can rent bike lockers at sky train stations, next they need to combine those lockers with a leased bike option. Theres manyw ays to approach the problem of traffic and sustainability, but one fact remains. Limiting the efficiency of car usage doesnt reduce the use of cars, all it does is make for pissed off voters who froth at the mouth for uneeded projects like bridge twinning. Upping the long term funding to transit routes south of the fraser would cost much less. dropping the west coast express money hole will free up funding to maintain a light rail city link system to chilliwack from surrey. For those who use the westcoast(like me) could suck it up and use routes slightly longer. Majority of wce ridership coukd use a more dedicated 160/190 route that still only goes to the same stops like their train bus service does

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I896 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2


----------



## qyrus (Apr 21, 2010)

So you're essentially saying cycling is less efficient than driving, unless driving is made more difficult due to bike lanes and more costly due to tolls. Now I'm all for personal choices but the keyword is personal- if you wish to travel by bike, by all means go for it but please don't ruin the road for other road users. The last thing I'd want is for Vancouver to turn into a nanny state like Britain.

In regards to climate change and pollution, have you ever thought that instead of shunning the automobile we should instead further improve it to overcome the problems we're facing now? Like it or not cars are here to stay, current society has built itself around it; it's in a very real sense the life blood of it. We depend on cars to transport people and goods to and from places quickly and efficiently to keep society going, to abandon it as a means of transport would be going backwards in human progress.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

Elle said:


> Comparing Vancouver to Copenhagen is ridiculous. Copenhagen is FLAT and compact. Vancouver has these things called hills, or mountains if you're on the North Shore, plus urban sprawl and obscene housing costs which forces people out of the city. I used to bike from Deer Lake to downtown, and many bike routes around the lower mainland can be pretty daunting for a beginner. I'm pretty fit and there were some hills on that ride which could be challenging. Also, most bike trips in Copenhagen are a lot shorter than your average Vancouver commute. It's one thing to ride 2-7km, quite another to ride 20-50km. Most trips commuters are traveling at least 20km. A lot of the cars coming into Vancouver come from outside the city proper where cycling is not practical and where there is no transit. Want to tell all those folks to cycle to work? Good luck.


The quote above is the only part of what you wrote with which I disagree (somewhat). Copenhagen has no big hills, but it has a steady north wind that is absolutely wicked in winter (it blew me over once while I was cycling). The winter temps are colder than Vancouver, it rains a lot too. In terms of compactness, Vancouver (especially the downtown) is likely more dense. Housing prices are about the same as Vancouver. People do commute from outside the city thanks to a light rail transit system (called the S-tow) that rings out in all directions from the center of the city. I agree with your arguing for light rail transit. In addition to the inter-urban lines you mentioned in your post, we should also reactivate the old inter-urban along Arbutus in the westside out to Steveston. If we had lots of light rail transit cycling would be a whole lot easier.

You wrote a thoughtful post, I agree with all your other points.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

> So you're essentially saying cycling is less efficient than driving, unless driving is made more difficult due to bike lanes and more costly due to tolls. Now I'm all for personal choices but the keyword is personal- if you wish to travel by bike, by all means go for it but please don't ruin the road for other road users. The last thing I'd want is for Vancouver to turn into a nanny state like Britain.


We need public policy to guide us in the right direction. If we allow the "free market" to decide we are screwed. Can you imagine trying to tackle the obesity problem in the USA (and increasingly here), by just telling people to eat healthy and not eat junk food? Or should we slap on a corn syrup/sugar tax to better reflect the true social cost of bad food choices? Tobacco springs to mind too. I see automobile use in the same category.



> In regards to climate change and pollution, have you ever thought that instead of shunning the automobile we should instead further improve it to overcome the problems we're facing now? Like it or not cars are here to stay, current society has built itself around it; it's in a very real sense the life blood of it. We depend on cars to transport people and goods to and from places quickly and efficiently to keep society going, to abandon it as a means of transport would be going backwards in human progress.


Sure, hybrid, compact and electric cars can all be part of the solution.


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

Elle, although i agree with most of what you said, barrier #1 is totally false. Being forced to the outter suburbs is a result of life style choices or the want to own a home, not a result of being low to mid income. I've accepted i'll likely be renting for life in this city because i will not move that far out and become house poor. Single Income, 2 kids with stay at home wife and we still are able to live comfortable, when there's no work its tough, but i don't have that mortgage forcing me to go work the mines or tar sands. I've rented around a transit hub (New west and Lougheed mall area) and the rent has been fair, with only 1 person every refusing me a place because i have kids (its illegal). So living closer is definitely an option for many, but maybe not as close as you like (ie vancouver). However certain life style choices can be very difficult to get a place (smoking, owning dogs/cats, motorsports, woodworking) but some of these can be overcome through newspaper ads seeking rental suites.

As for commute times, i live where it often takes over an hour to go one way to/from work. But this is using transit, through this time i wind down, relax, sleep, read, listen to music, use the forums, or sometimes converse with people. its not wasted time like it would be battling traffic in a car. Sure i love to get home quickly, spending $$$ on car payments, insurance, maintenance and gas isn't worth an extra 30min to an hour a day. I'd rather keep that +$10k/y for my family, invest it into something useful, like my kids future.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Vancouver has been named the 2nd most congested city in North America. We really don't need to make it the first..


----------



## mcrocker (May 29, 2010)

I recently started cycling to work a few days a week, and I'm actually pretty impressed with the network of bike routes through Vancouver. They aren't all dedicated bike lanes, the others are quiet streets due to traffic calming devices that block some turns for cars.(Not sure when these were put in but it wasn't any time recently) See the bike routes listed here:

Routes - Bikeways & maps - Cycling - Transportation - Engineering Services, City of Vancouver

That grid of routes allows travel pretty-much anywhere in the Vancouver area. I still like being able to drive when I want to, and I think that adding too many of the dedicated bike lanes like they did downtown will make traffic worse because of turning restrictions and routing cars around the bike lanes.

I think Vancouver should continue with the current strategy until the existing bike lanes have capacity issues. They cover just about all the area they need to, and don't interfere much with automobile traffic. They get moderate use on nice days like we have had this week, but will be empty for much of the year. It is a waste of road to keep cars off them entirely.

Just my 2 cents...


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Also, keep in mind not everyone is capable of riding a bike nor do they have the time to. My parents would never be able to ride 1.5hrs just to get to work one way. 
What about carrying stuff too? Anything more than a backpack is going to be a problem for many people. Babies/Toddlers?

Honestly I rarely see bike lanes congested, bikers don't need an extra lane.

I love biking but it really is only ideal for leisurely rides, if you don't live far from the workplace, and if you don't plan on carrying anything else with you.


----------



## J'sRacing (Apr 25, 2012)

This whole topic is stupid. There are so many problems with this:
The main congestion that we have is going into downtown and possibly the bridges during rush hour.

There is no way in hell that people who need to be dressed in a suit would bike to work. It's called being a business professional. Actually on that topic, what do you do for work?

Your other idea, adding a toll to go into congestion zones is even more ridiculous, i'll just never ever go to that area. Result? Slow business.

Enjoy carrying your brand new fish tank home on your child's toy. 


What they actually need to do: remove bike lanes, widen roads and don't forget: charge cyclists insurance.

By the way you also have a very strong case of selective reading: Copenhagen is a city where a majority of its citizens travel via bicycle, you can't just force the entire vancouver to adopt to this hippy cow snorting cow feces idea.


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

Just because someone has a different opinion than your's doesn't make their idea stupid. People have different views, accept it. I have managed to get many fish tanks home, not owning a car. As for congested areas take downtown vancouver for instance. Majority of business is foot traffic based retail, tourism and office work. office workers do not need their personal vehicles downtown, they have plenty of options to get to work on time with parking outside the downtown core at less cost than parking within the core. Tourists use transit, cabs, tour buses and their feet. Business will not slow, the location is prime despite any traffic regulations they impose. I would be all for an all out ban in the downtown core for vehicle traffic, minus delivery vans, resident parking, cabs, buses, service trucks. Remember the area is small enough to walk across on foot at ease, its not a very large areas. Suits are able to walk just like everyone else. Just because its not as easy doesn't make it improbable.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

I've seen people in suits on bikes. And dresses. There are "commuter" bikes specifically built for this, although they suck severely at hills. And I work downtown and can tell you that most people walk or take transit to get around in the core. The bigger transport issue is people commuting in to work from outside the city, which could be addressed to some degree with my suggestion about allowing more telecommuting, which frees space for necessary traffic like deliveries.



> barrier #1 is totally false. Being forced to the outter suburbs is a result of life style choices or the want to own a home, not a result of being low to mid income. I've accepted i'll likely be renting for life in this city because i will not move that far out and become house poor. Single Income, 2 kids with stay at home wife and we still are able to live comfortable, when there's no work its tough, but i don't have that mortgage forcing me to go work the mines or tar sands. I've rented around a transit hub (New west and Lougheed mall area) and the rent has been fair, with only 1 person every refusing me a place because i have kids (its illegal). So living closer is definitely an option for many, but maybe not as close as you like (ie vancouver). However certain life style choices can be very difficult to get a place (smoking, owning dogs/cats, motorsports, woodworking) but some of these can be overcome through newspaper ads seeking rental suites.


I'm not talking specifically about those who bought into the whole "let's pay $500K for a crappy shoebox"; that's another rant. Family rental housing IS an issue in the city of Vancouver, and there's a dearth of good rental stock. Yes, you can live outside the core or where you describe, and yes lifestyle choices affect this. But saying that "it's lifestyle choices" doesn't address the existing reality that a lot of people for whatever reason live a long way from work, and can't afford to or will not make the changes to move closer in. They still have to work; and businesses still need employees to function. Telling them that they made the "wrong" choice by your lights is not going to do anything but create animosity.

If you're trying to encourage cycling and decrease traffic to the city, you have to address this factor, whether that's by making transit more accessible so they can walk/cycle to from stations at each end, or by eliminating the need to commute. I think we're going to see more and more businesses moving out to Surrey after the Port Mann tolls kick in, simply because they will not be able to retain their cheap workers who can't afford to live closer.

Off topic, on getting large loads around in a small vehicle: Do It Yourself (DIY) Humor - Vastly Overloaded Car - Idiot Driver.


----------



## josephl (Apr 21, 2010)

J'sRacing said:


> This whole topic is stupid. There are so many problems with this:
> The main congestion that we have is going into downtown and possibly the bridges during rush hour.
> 
> There is no way in hell that people who need to be dressed in a suit would bike to work. It's called being a business professional. Actually on that topic, what do you do for work?
> ...


It's not good not being respectful of other people's opinions(just because they are different than yours dosen't mean that they are wrong or that they should be ridiculed), they are just a different opinion, that's what living in a democracy is all about.

But back to the topic at hand, I am a Vancouver resident who lives close to downtown and who pays really high property taxes in Vancouver, plus having metered water for the privilege of living in Vancouver proper and the privilege of everything I need being at most a 30 min drive or maybe a 90 min bike ride away(in Steveston).

I have had to wear suits to work and it's pretty convenient, you pack it with you on the bike, along with your laptop, there are special bags designed for both) and you shower at work. The City of Vancouver requires every downtown office building to have secure bike storage and a shower.

As for wider roads and more bridges, keep in mind that Vancouver residents themselves only need 3 bridges, Burrard, Granville and Cambie. All other bridges are used to support people coming in from the suburbs. Subarban commuters do not pay City of Vancouver taxes, yet they still have the right to use the City roadways.

As a Vancouver resident, I strongly support more bike paths and green initiatives. I would love to see more electric car plug ins, I would love to see more speed bumps to slow traffic and I would love to see more $ pumped into public transit. I am also in favor of higher gas taxes IF 100% OF THE GAS TAX IS COMMITTED TO TRANSIT INITIATIVES. All it will cost us is a little time and effort to keep the environment a little cleaner and if commuting from the suburbs gets too tedious and too expensive, I would assume that finding jobs in your own neighbourhood instead of long commutes would become more common.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

Elle's suggestion about telecommuting has a lot of merit. I know many companies over the last 5-10 years have begun allowing some employees to work from home one or more days a week, as long as they get the work done. 

As an academic tutor, I used to drive all over the Lower Mainland (typical Saturday was start from Burnaby to D/T Van, then Richmond, then Surrey, then Coq., then PoCo, then home to Burnaby.) Now most of my work comes to me through email, I see students at home, and they use email transfers to pay a lot of times. If I maintained my old ways (drive everywhere), then I would not be able to mod this site for instance, or spend nearly as much time raising my daughters. The flip side is my students drive to me a lot more now.

I have other relatives who work at home two or three days a week and they get more work done, yet spend more time with family. 

At the same time, I would be lost without my CRV because I do most of the shopping for our family and pick up stuff for my addictions (i.e. aquariums, bags of soil for the garden, lumber and building supplies for home renos). If I didn't have a vehicle, I would be unable to do all that since it would be too expensive to pay someone with a vehicle to deliver everything all the time. 

So while my work commute is greatly reduced compared to in the past, I still need to use a vehicle for moving my family and purchases around. 

I would not be picking up anything larger than a 10g if I had to use transit and NOT carrying a tank while biking.

So I can honestly state that without a vehicle, I would likely no longer be able to do most of the things I enjoy the most, like large sw tanks, renos and urban farming, in part because I am Obsessive-Compulsive and live by a "go big or go home" philosophy with my addictions. I also enjoy throwing lots of parties and bbqs in the summer and NOT having a vehicle would really limit how much food I can buy using transit or bike compared to having my CRV.

We do plan that when our girls are big enough, we will cycle to their relatives' homes since most of our extended families lives within 15 minutes drive/45 minutes bike ride. However, we would only do that on nice sunny days. 

Anthony


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

> I am a Vancouver resident who lives close to downtown and who pays really high property taxes in Vancouver, plus having metered water for the privilege of living in Vancouver proper and the privilege of everything I need being at most a 30 min drive or maybe a 90 min bike ride away(in Steveston).
> .....
> As for wider roads and more bridges, keep in mind that Vancouver residents themselves only need 3 bridges, Burrard, Granville and Cambie. All other bridges are used to support people coming in from the suburbs. Subarban commuters do not pay City of Vancouver taxes, yet they still have the right to use the City roadways.


I hate to point this out, but the city of Vancouver is in no way self-sustaining, and would be pretty screwed without the suburban workers and products brought in from said suburbs. So unless you plan to start a Soylent Green farm, you do need those other bridges. Vancouver also gets a disproportionate share of the services from Translink compared to other regions (crappy transit in the Valley and Surrey is an example of this, or the RAV line being leapfrogged over the Evergreen line). So the elitist attitude is a little short sighted, and is in part the CAUSE of the high property taxes (that and civic financial mismanagement).

I live on the North Shore, and all the Vancouver residents who come over the bridge to work, go skiing etc. don't pay my civic taxes either. However, the majority do support or work for local business, which in turn pays taxes to the district/city.

It's a two way street, no pun intended. If Vancouver wants to make travel in the city a user pay all affair, well and good, but don't be surprised if businesses and industry choose to move and take their tax dollars with them to where they'll get more customers and workers. I'm still betting that after the Port Mann goes ahead, there will be a number of businesses relocating to the other side of the river, and certainly a lot of people reshuffling their jobs if they can.


----------



## josephl (Apr 21, 2010)

Elle said:


> I hate to point this out, but the city of Vancouver is in no way self-sustaining, and would be pretty screwed without the suburban workers and products brought in from said suburbs. So unless you plan to start a Soylent Green farm, you do need those other bridges. Vancouver also gets a disproportionate share of the services from Translink compared to other regions (crappy transit in the Valley and Surrey is an example of this, or the RAV line being leapfrogged over the Evergreen line). So the elitist attitude is a little short sighted, and is in part the CAUSE of the high property taxes (that and civic financial mismanagement).
> 
> I live on the North Shore, and all the Vancouver residents who come over the bridge to work, go skiing etc. don't pay my civic taxes either. However, the majority do support or work for local business, which in turn pays taxes to the district/city.
> 
> It's a two way street, no pun intended. If Vancouver wants to make travel in the city a user pay all affair, well and good, but don't be surprised if businesses and industry choose to move and take their tax dollars with them to where they'll get more customers and workers. I'm still betting that after the Port Mann goes ahead, there will be a number of businesses relocating to the other side of the river, and certainly a lot of people reshuffling their jobs if they can.


To be clear, I wasn't at all encouraging the 'not in my neighbourhood approach', I'll pretty well in full agreement with everything that you said from a 'realistic' point of view, my earlier comments were from a more selfish self serving tax paying view point but writing it made me feel better


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

> my earlier comments were from a more selfish self serving tax paying view point but writing it made me feel better


If we're going there, I'm going to comment that I wish all of the Translink management and board members and the transportation minister and his flunkies could be forced to bus from Vancouver to Abbotsford and back EVERY DAY for a year. No exceptions. Oh, and they have to travel during rush hour only. And they can only have a salary of $30K per year.

That would guarantee some speedy improvements to the system, i'll bet.


----------



## josephl (Apr 21, 2010)

Elle said:


> If we're going there, I'm going to comment that I wish all of the Translink management and board members and the transportation minister and his flunkies could be forced to bus from Vancouver to Abbotsford and back EVERY DAY for a year. No exceptions. Oh, and they have to travel during rush hour only. And they can only have a salary of $30K per year.
> 
> That would guarantee some speedy improvements to the system, i'll bet.


Isn't that the truth.

On a tangent, I always wondered if countries would go to war less often if it was a requirment that either the countries leader or one of their family of military age be front and center at risk on the front lines the whole time.

To your point though, if you don't use/live the system, its so much easier to justify things through a spreadsheet and through meetings then pat yourself on the back for a job well done and give yourself a bonus.

Back to the bike paths, love them or not, for those of you that commute on bikes in Vancouver, don't you love how the City leaves you on your own at certain points where then can't figure out how to get cyclist from point a to point be safetly? There are a few bike paths where the bike path officially ends, cyclist are left on their own to fight with traffic merging and exiting and after the congestion, the bike path begins again a couple of blocks later. Way to step up!!


----------



## catgoldfish (Apr 21, 2010)

There are a lot of bikes on the road now because of the weather. What happens when we have our rain downpours from October to May?


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

catgoldfish said:


> There are a lot of bikes on the road now because of the weather. What happens when we have our rain downpours from October to May?


You go to Mountain Equipment Coop, buy some decent rain gear, make sure your bike has fenders and good lights, and you keep cycling! 

Here is a great link showing how people cycle during the winter in Denmark (even in snowstorms!):

http://www.copenhagencyclechic.com/2010/11/cycle-chic-guide-10-cycling-in-winter.html

If they can do it, so can we!


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

J'sRacing said:


> There is no way in hell that people who need to be dressed in a suit would bike to work. It's called being a business professional.


Can't wear a suit or dress stylishly while cycling? Think again! 

Cycle Chic®



J'sRacing said:


> By the way you also have a very strong case of selective reading: Copenhagen is a city where a majority of its citizens travel via bicycle, you can't just force the entire vancouver to adopt to this hippy cow snorting cow feces idea.


Only in Copenhagen/Denmark you say? Not fit for Vancouver you say? Think again! 

Cycle Chic®: Cycle Chic ® Goes to Vancouver

And concerning, road tolls? Well, maybe they do not go far enough; perhaps we need GPS car mileage tracking as a way to get more tax revenue (user pay, very fair) in order to pay for improved transit:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...ould-be-tracked-by-gps-taxed-per-mile-driven/


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Honestly, the quickest way to get from point A to point B for the majority of people is by car. It is a necessary means of transportation for many people. It is not a necessity to create another bike lane. If the bike lanes are congested then I would be supportive of the idea, but they're not. It's great that you're passionate about biking, but no need to make it worse for everyone else who depend on driving. Bikers and drivers can both happily transport themselves and share the road. 

What's with all the tolls? What's wrong with driving a car? There's no need to diminish something else just because you're more supportive of another form of transportation.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

PSpades said:


> What's wrong with driving a car?


Fossil fuel burning cars cause pollution and make for unhealthy cities. Ocean acidification and climate change are global problems with roots in our automobile culture.

We need to transition away from oil burning cars to more environmentally friendly versions (hybrids and electric). More public transit and more bikes are also part of the solution.

Besides cycling a lot, I also drive a car. Why? Because our society basically forces me to; I can imagine a Vancouver with a different structure, however, that might allow me to get rid of my car.

I support an attitude shift on the part of society. What I am trying to do here is challenge people to think outside the box and support public policy that supports cycling and public transit.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

That's one thing I find irritating about the new breed of cycling "fanatics" (term used in the most positive connotations by SeaHorse_Fanatic of course) is that there seems to be a sense of "our way or the highway" attitude, especially with the Vancouver politicians. Those monthly "block all traffic in downtown" rides is a prime example. Yes, let's go out of our way to PO all the drivers we inconvenience, but if one of them loses their temper, it's all the driver's fault. If this was happening in the States, some crazed road-raging driver would have loaded up his guns and driven his 4x4 pickup through the crowd already. I stay as far away from d/t as possible because of these types of things. If they want d/t to be a car-free zone, then good luck when all the businesses that sell anything heavier than 5 or 10lbs and can't fit in a small backpack flees to more car-friendly cities/suburbs. Not everybody, including myself, wants to give up the convenience of driving. I cycled most everywhere from the age of 10 till 27. Now, with 2 kids and lots of stuff to transport all the time, biking everywhere is NOT a realistic option, no matter what the bike-Nazis want people to believe. Commuting by bike or living d/t or close to work enough to bike there is often a "life-style" choice. I choose NOT to make that choice. I minimize my driving when possible (mostly due to the price of gas & I like being at home with my family). I rode literally thousands of kilometers when I was younger, and that too was a choice (financial & otherwise). 

As Elle & others pointed out, the Lower Mainland is far hillier & more spread out with far greater distances to travel than Copenhagen. Also, just watch the bike lanes on rainy or snowy days and it becomes obvious that we are nowhere near capacity on existing bike lanes and that Vancouver's weather is NOT conducive to cycling year-round or even half the year. Remember we've only had sunny weather for the last two weeks. Before that, there were very few cyclists on the road due to all the rain in JUNE.

On another note, I actually saw a cyclist who:

a) wore a helmet
b) used correct turn hand signals
c) followed road rules & proper road etiquette

I was soooooo shocked, I almost stopped driving to rub my eyes to make sure I wasn't seeing things, I was that shaken up

Far too often (every day), I see cyclists with no helmets, riding without watching for cars or pedestrians, wearing headphones covering both ears so that can't hear traffic, and sometimes riding side-by-side talking instead of in a line paying attention to the road. When I see families riding by like this, I feel like smacking the parents and telling them to set better examples to their children by wearing helmets and obeying traffic laws. 

And for those who think I am speaking only as a driver, know that I used to be "expert" enough of a cyclist to ride for several kilometers without using my hands (NOT that I recommend this very dangerous maneuver) and was more at home on my bike than walking or driving. We used to cycle 50 to 80 km for fun or for cyclathons. However, even when I used to ride several hundred kilometers a week, I never would have demanded dedicated bike lanes or other bikers' first type amenities. I understood that the roads were built for cars & drivers, and that as a cyclist, I was sharing the road with their primary users. 

Anthony


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

The quickest method isn't always the best. Its a combination of trip time, cost, anxiety level and personal views that need to be taken into account. Saving 20 minutes to 30 minutes a day any paying a ton more for commuting, parking, etc, doesn't add up in my views. I dont take transit because i think about the environment, i take it because it works, and many don't actually need a car, they just prefer to have one for convenience sake. 

I've used transit for the following:
Fish tanks
90 lb AC unit
Toilet bowl and tank
Co2 Reloads
Groceries
BBQ prep
Family events
lumber
commuting to work
and lots lots more.

Issues i've encountered with being transit only with no car:
No Camping trips with the kids
i like to be 30-40 min early for work, but sometimes get stuck with only being 10 minutes early.
System interruptions, In my career as an electrician since 2004, i've been late around 4 or 5 times due to transit. Twice was weather related on top of that. Theres a reason i like to be early, i get to read the paper, a book, enjoy a coffee or eat if i didn't have time to at home before work, meaning im more awake to do my job.
Bus is full (normally this is related to horrible planning on what stops you get on or routing. or Shuttle buses carrying the yuppy WCE riders 
trip time runs out (very rare extra long commutes or when you pick up groceries on the way home. Most drivers let people go with it if its within a reasonable time, despite translinks policy.

Now a lot of things that people fail to see:
Emergencies have emergency vehicles, it may cost per use, but its such a rarity to need it, the cost is non existent in the long term.
They have these things called Cabs. They are awesome when you really have something heavy. I've used them for fish tank purchases before  I use a cab about twice a month, often times its due to my wife forgetting to tell me groceries on the way home and i get the, "Oh we need flour, sugar, potatoes, toilet paper, milk, laundry detergeant and coffee cream" dreaded list.
The Rare large purchases have delivery options, even building supplies. making deals with people through classifieds classifieds can include haggling for delivery, just be fair about it, gas mileage and time.
you can carpool to take out some inconvenient parts of a trip, or as a favour to someone wanting the HOV lane for part of the trip (or all of it)
ITS CHEAP! DIRT CHEAP. I pay for my bus pass for 1 zone, i addfare since i never know where i work, plus it removes the possibility of trip expired on my way home. For 1 zone to 3 zone, faresavers work as add fares, giving you a further discount.
Sundays my family can go anywhere on the transit system for free thanks to the bus pass. so entices family outtings 

This is my reasons to transit, it works for my choices, some it may not, but many will be surprised at what they can do on the system. Its more inconvenient than a car, no one argues that.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

stratos said:


> Besides cycling a lot, I also drive a car. Why? Because our society basically forces me to;


Who is forcing you to drive a car?

Society?

Who is society?

Nobody forced me to ride a bike and not own/drive my vehicle till I was in my late 20s. That was my choice. Stating that "society basically forces me to... drive a car" is really a cop-out IMHO. I own a CRV because I CHOSE to own and drive one. NOBODY FORCED me to make this decision. We live in a free society where owning a vehicle is NOT forced on anyone, especially based on your own arguments about everyone cycling to work, shopping, etc. Sell your car and live car-free. Then come back and be the BCA bike guru. Society forces you to pay taxes. Society forces you to follow the laws or face the consequences. AGAIN, Society does NOT force you to own a car, a bike, a boat, a plane, a hot-air balloon, a hover-craft, a "beam-me-up Scotty" transporter...

Me thinkus that your last statement blaming society for YOU owning a CAR lost you a lot of creditability here, Stratos.


----------



## hlee72ca (Jun 29, 2010)

If cyclists want more bike lanes, let them pay for them, through licensing $50-100 per year. Motorists pay through gas taxes already. Let the cyclists pay their share for road improvements. Also, police should enforce traffic violations on cyclists. More tickets, more $$$ for policing.


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

That would be awesome... Just imagine if society forced us to own hovercrafts.... Oh great... Now I want a hovercraft! Thanks seahorse! Lol

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

SeaHorse_Fanatic said:


> Who is forcing you to drive a car?
> 
> Society?
> 
> ...


You are playing with semantics. Interchange "force" with "coerce", "need" with "require for the purpose of earning a sufficient living to live in Vancouver and/or maintaining the social integration of oneself and one's family". I suppose I could write as a lawyer if needed, and include asterixes and footnotes to qualify statements and provide precise definitions, but you should know better  Some examples of how society "coerces" me into "needing" (*as per definition of "needs" provided above):

The decision of Vancouver youth soccer clubs to amalgamate and thereby arrange games all over the lower mainland means that chauffeuring kids to soccer requires a car. Had the "powers that be" not amalgamated and kept games more localized, I wouldn't need a car just so my kids can play soccer and attend weekly practices (which are scattered all over as well). Not to mention public transit is woefully insufficient for the task.

The "powers that be" cut the B-Line running down Granville St. out to Richmond to once an hour. I work in Richmond and depended on the old regularly scheduled B-Line for commuting (along with my bike). Alas, no longer possible, thus on some days I need a car, especially if the kids have dental or medical appointments.

My wife works in a consulting related field that requires travel all over the Lower Mainland. The "powers that be" have not invested in the public transit my wife needs to get to work.

The three examples above show how a typical family with young children is forced to choose between using a car or else hindering their children's social integration and health (community sports) or else hindering one's career. This is a false choice that should not be foisted upon any of us. If we INVESTED IN PUBLIC TRANSIT and PROMOTED ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION we would not be in this dilemma!

Furthermore, our car focussed culture was likely the deliberate product of industrial policy at the highest levels following World War Two to get people to work in factories building cars and petrochemical products and asphalt. Basically all the crap that is ruining the planet.



> The General Motors streetcar conspiracy (also known as the National City Lines conspiracy) refers to allegations and convictions in relation to a program by General Motors (GM) and a number of other companies to purchase and dismantle streetcars (trams/trolleys) and electric trains in many cities across the United States and replace them with bus services. The lack of clear information about exactly what occurred has led to intrigue, inaccuracy and conspiracy theories with some citing it as the primary reason for the virtual elimination of effective public transport in many American cities by the 1970s.


You can read about it in more detail here: General Motors streetcar conspiracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is the conspiracy referenced above "proven"? Likely not. But you only have to look around and ask yourself why the world is structured the way it is to get the answers. It is all about the $$$.

Until we change our attitudes as a society we are on a doomed environmental path.

Society needs to change such that people like me who want to dump their car but feel they can not because they are somehow being put at a disadvantage (or their children), CAN DUMP THEIR CARS!

And that takes public policy.


----------



## effox (Apr 21, 2010)

hlee72ca said:


> If cyclists want more bike lanes, let them pay for them, through licensing $50-100 per year. Motorists pay through gas taxes already. Let the cyclists pay their share for road improvements. Also, police should enforce traffic violations on cyclists. More tickets, more $$$ for policing.


Couldn't agreed more.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

How am "I" playing with semantics when YOU are the ones providing the exact words I quote? I don't get this complaint at all?


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

stratos said:


> Fossil fuel burning cars cause pollution and make for unhealthy cities. Ocean acidification and climate change are global problems with roots in our automobile culture.
> 
> We need to transition away from oil burning cars to more environmentally friendly versions (hybrids and electric). More public transit and more bikes are also part of the solution.
> 
> ...


Isn't that what we're already doing? Cars are becoming a lot greener. Taking away a car lane won't solve anything anything except anger more people. Bottom line, bikers don't need an extra lane. How about encourage and support the shift in making technology more Eco-friendly? Technology has helped made our lives easier and cars have a huge impact in increasing efficiency. Public transit is a great system except it is too slow. It takes me 1.5hrs one way to commute to UBC whereas 30-40min by car. I do bus only because it's what I can afford, not because it's better for the environment.

" Its a combination of trip time, cost, anxiety level and personal views that need to be taken into account. Saving 20 minutes to 30 minutes a day any paying a ton more for commuting, parking, etc, doesn't add up in my views."
Neven, I get more stressed every time I have to bus. I decided one time to make a trip to Doug. The bus comes every hour. I ran off the skytrain in fear that I missed the bus, luckily I didn't. I could only afford to spend ~10min at Doug's before having to leave to catch the return bus. I ran out just as the bus came..now if I missed that bus and had to wait another hour......$%^#[email protected]!

Where do we have to pay a ton more for parking? I've never had to pay for parking in DT or wherever but only once in Burnaby which cost me $1.50. Sure when I park for free I'd have to walk 5-10min longer than others who pay for parking but it's worth getting there 30min earlier by car.

I do support the public transit system though, it just needs to be more efficient. Convenience is a big issue and most people try to do whatever it takes to save time. My parents do not have the energy nor the time to transfer 4 times just to get to work one way.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

SeaHorse_Fanatic said:


> How am "I" playing with semantics when YOU are the ones providing the exact words I quote? I don't get this complaint at all?


You are a mod who can read between the lines.


----------



## J'sRacing (Apr 25, 2012)

neven said:


> Just because someone has a different opinion than your's doesn't make their idea stupid. People have different views, accept it. I have managed to get many fish tanks home, not owning a car. As for congested areas take downtown vancouver for instance. Majority of business is foot traffic based retail, tourism and office work. office workers do not need their personal vehicles downtown, they have plenty of options to get to work on time with parking outside the downtown core at less cost than parking within the core. Tourists use transit, cabs, tour buses and their feet. Business will not slow, the location is prime despite any traffic regulations they impose. I would be all for an all out ban in the downtown core for vehicle traffic, minus delivery vans, resident parking, cabs, buses, service trucks. Remember the area is small enough to walk across on foot at ease, its not a very large areas. Suits are able to walk just like everyone else. Just because its not as easy doesn't make it improbable.


I do accept it, i accept that in society there will be morons. Taking away another driving lane isn't going to change the city for good. It is only going to piss off more people.
Did you get those tanks delivered or did you cycle them home  Or better yet, did you take public transit home? if you took public transit home with your fish tank, i'm sorry theres no other way to put it, but you are an inconsiderate person. Using up all that room for your tank just because you want to be cheap. Oh and i'm having trouble not laughing about office workers not wanting to park within the core. None of my friends that are professionals would ever be spotted cycling away like a tard all dressed up.



josephl said:


> It's not good not being respectful of other people's opinions(just because they are different than yours dosen't mean that they are wrong or that they should be ridiculed), they are just a different opinion, that's what living in a democracy is all about.
> 
> But back to the topic at hand, I am a Vancouver resident who lives close to downtown and who pays really high property taxes in Vancouver, plus having metered water for the privilege of living in Vancouver proper and the privilege of everything I need being at most a 30 min drive or maybe a 90 min bike ride away(in Steveston).
> 
> ...


Since when did living in democracy mean i have to put up with insane ideas? No i'm sorry i don't feel like going to work and then changing before i actually have to work. And the point about suburban commuters not paying city of vancouver taxes is moot, you really think vancouver gets all its resources from its core? We vancouverites also spend alot of money in the tri-cities.



stratos said:


> You go to Mountain Equipment Coop, buy some decent rain gear, make sure your bike has fenders and good lights, and you keep cycling!
> 
> Here is a great link showing how people cycle during the winter in Denmark (even in snowstorms!):
> 
> ...


If they jump off a bridge, are you going to jump off a bridge? If Bill gates can create an empire from rags, can you? 
Just because there are thousands of people out there that like to be uncomfortable, doesn't mean i want to.



stratos said:


> Can't wear a suit or dress stylishly while cycling? Think again!
> 
> Cycle Chic®
> 
> ...


1st off: i'm not going to take any website who's slogan is "Style over Speed" seriously, because obviously i want to get to my destinations quickly and in a presentable manner. Are you going to tell me that if i have to meet a client 10kms away from my office that i should: 
1) grab my bicycle
2) sweat my balls off
3) go to the client's building
4) shower
5) do my presentation

Secondly: DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW BAD OUR RIGHTS WOULD BE TORN IF THE GOVERNMENT IS ALLOWED TO ADD A GPS TRACKING DEVICE TO ALL OUR CARS? DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH PRECEDENT THAT WOULD BE SETTING?
Didn't think you'd know and besides the government has no rights to add devices to already purchased cars, but it'd be fun to see how many people riot.



neven said:


> The quickest method isn't always the best. Its a combination of trip time, cost, anxiety level and personal views that need to be taken into account. Saving 20 minutes to 30 minutes a day any paying a ton more for commuting, parking, etc, doesn't add up in my views. I dont take transit because i think about the environment, i take it because it works, and many don't actually need a car, they just prefer to have one for convenience sake.
> 
> Issues i've encountered with being transit only with no car:
> No Camping trips with the kids
> ...


Wait what? the quickest method isn't the best? Anxiety level? What the heck? Personal views? (read hippy) I don't see how you're only saving 20-30 mins a day. Take for example: any place in east van to richmond is easily a 1hr trip each way, where by car its less than 15 min each way. The cost of parking? Although parking in downtown is relatively expensive, its still less money than what i make per hour. So in actuality i'm saving money by getting there faster.



PSpades said:


> Isn't that what we're already doing? Cars are becoming a lot greener. Taking away a car lane won't solve anything anything except anger more people. Bottom line, bikers don't need an extra lane. How about encourage and support the shift in making technology more Eco-friendly? Technology has helped made our lives easier and cars have a huge impact in increasing efficiency. Public transit is a great system except it is too slow. It takes me 1.5hrs one way to commute to UBC whereas 30-40min by car. I do bus only because it's what I can afford, not because it's better for the environment.
> 
> " Its a combination of trip time, cost, anxiety level and personal views that need to be taken into account. Saving 20 minutes to 30 minutes a day any paying a ton more for commuting, parking, etc, doesn't add up in my views."
> Neven, I get more stressed every time I have to bus. I decided one time to make a trip to Doug. The bus comes every hour. I ran off the skytrain in fear that I missed the bus, luckily I didn't. I could only afford to spend ~10min at Doug's before having to leave to catch the return bus. I ran out just as the bus came..now if I missed that bus and had to wait another hour......$%^#[email protected]!
> ...


I'm going to have to agree, the future isn't cycling but rather alternative energies. IE hydrogen powered vehicles.


----------



## effox (Apr 21, 2010)

Don't disagree with you, but don't call him a hippy.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

We'd all be a lot better off if we cycled more:

Lack of exercise kills roughly as many as smoking, study says - latimes.com


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

..People drive to the gym..everyone would be better off if they just exercised, not just cycle..irrelevant to adding a bike lane and taking away a car lane.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

J'sRacing said:


> 1st off: i'm not going to take any website who's slogan is "Style over Speed" seriously, because obviously i want to get to my destinations quickly and in a presentable manner. Are you going to tell me that if i have to meet a client 10kms away from my office that i should:
> 1) grab my bicycle
> 2) sweat my balls off
> 3) go to the client's building
> ...


Haha thanks for that, I haven't laughed all day.


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

The issue is public policy...as in the government changing our society and/or coercing us to do things we otherwise would not do that are in our own best individual and collective interest.

Here is a simple example: hiking of the cost of cigarettes, putting gross labels on cigarette packs, hiding cigarettes behind shutters in stores and banning advertising for them are all examples of progressive public policy. 20 years ago some of the same kinds of arguments being used here against more cycling infrastructure would likely be used to argue for the free and open use of tobacco. The problem is we humans are often either too stupid or lack the will power necessary to do what is in our own best individual and collective interests. 

I actually find this philosophically disturbing as it leads me to Plato's famous quote of "The wise should lead, the ignorant should follow". This goes against my deeply ingrained belief in democracy and the need for social/political consensus. In turn this leads me to conclude that reason and logic are our best, perhaps only defense against ourselves. When you look at the big picture, a society (or world) in which we have more cycles and fewer cars just makes sense.

I say three cheers for the existing bike lanes!  And three cheers for the bike lanes to come! 

And as for sweaty balls, well carry a hanky or some talcum powder if you feel the need.


----------



## J'sRacing (Apr 25, 2012)

stratos said:


> We'd all be a lot better off if we cycled more:
> 
> Lack of exercise kills roughly as many as smoking, study says - latimes.com


How does this even relate? Living a healthy life style doesn't mean or increase the need to cycle. Being obese is a life style decision. Taking away driving lanes doesn't change the situation. What would change the situation is have an obesity tax, just like how Japan does.

You are now just grabbing random links about health and excercise. It's not helping to prove your point, not that anyone believed it in the first place.



stratos said:


> The issue is public policy...as in the government changing our society and/or coercing us to do things we otherwise would not do that are in our own best individual and collective interest.
> 
> Here is a simple example: hiking of the cost of cigarettes, putting gross labels on cigarette packs, hiding cigarettes behind shutters in stores and banning advertising for them are all examples of progressive public policy. 20 years ago some of the same kinds of arguments being used here against more cycling infrastructure would likely be used to argue for the free and open use of tobacco. The problem is we humans are often either too stupid or lack the will power necessary to do what is in our own best individual and collective interests.
> 
> ...


No seriously, whatever it is that you've been smoking, i want some. The issue is not public policy, the issue is VIABILITY of solutions. You're right the government is changing our society and coercing us to do things we otherwise wouldn't do: such as pissing everyone off with those god damn bike lanes, since it isn't better for the individual or as a collective whole.

Your example...i really hope you did some research into this. Hiking the cost of cigarettes, putting gross labels, hiding them behidn shutters and banning them HAS DONE NOTHING. The amount of smokers has not decreased at all.

Philosophically i think you might have shot yourself in the foot. It is for the exact reason that you are not leading. When you look at the big picture, a society (or world) in which we have better alternative energies and "my way or the highway" just makes sense.

I say three cheers for Canada is not being a communist country  And three more cheers for the irresponsible lane hogging cyclists that will get run over! 

PS, i used something called sarcasm. It might be hard for SOME people to understand.

OFF TOPIC: 
Doesn't this look so much better








THAN:








??


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Ahhhhhhhh, it's not about getting rid of cars! The big picture is NOT: have more bicycles and fewer cars! Why get rid of technology that has advanced the human race? It's about improvement! Finding ways to even further the technology we've created like making cars so that they're more Eco-friendly. Improvement improvement improvement, moving forward instead of back-pedaling! Not to say that it is never better to go back, sometimes it is best to revert back to simpler things. But in this case, there are already cars that don't require gas at all. People are already slowly adjusting to greener or less gas consuming vehicles. There already are greener initiatives such as hybrid only parking spots, rebate on hybrids, etc. 

I wouldn't be surprised if in the future the majority vehicles wouldn't need to rely on gas (and if they did it would be minimal). Now if I looked into a crystal ball and saw that in the future and the main mode of transportation is [email protected]#$%!..they better be super-bicycles with extra storage compartments and super powerful motors to make the trip faster and easier. Even some bicycles are electric now..electric cars, electric bikes..both don't rely on gas so if I had the choice, I'll have one electric car over a bicycle please. I don't see how taking away a car lane and adding a bike lane will make the world a greener place since that seems to be the reasoning behind the motive.


----------



## BaoBeiZhu (Apr 24, 2010)

cyclists are sometimes worst than c-lai drivers.. just sayin


----------



## Diztrbd1 (Apr 21, 2010)

J'sRacing said:


> I do accept it, i accept that in society there will be morons.


might just be me, but seems as you really like to stir the pot 'eh? You really love these kinds of threads from the looks of things. An old saying comes to mind here...takes one......



J'sRacing said:


> Taking away another driving lane isn't going to change the city for good. It is only going to **** off more people.
> Did you get those tanks delivered or did you cycle them home  Or better yet, did you take public transit home? if you took public transit home with your fish tank, i'm sorry theres no other way to put it, but you are an inconsiderate person. Using up all that room for your tank just because you want to be cheap. Oh and i'm having trouble not laughing about office workers not wanting to park within the core. None of my friends that are professionals would ever be spotted cycling away like a tard all dressed up.


Ya know...not everyone has a perfect life, where that they can afford to drive everywhere they go, let alone afford to even own a car. For that matter some cannot drive due to a physical impairments or something. I am a avid cyclist, mainly due to I have a crippled right ankle that impairs my ability to apply or reduce the proper pressure to the gas and brake pedals. Therefore I ride a bike. I can't say I have ever carried a tank home on it, but I have brought a couple home on the skytrain , without the bike. Luckily I also have friends who don't mind helping out and a time or 2 I hired someone to help move whatever. Just because someone is an avid cyclist and it's the main source of their transportation, or using public transit to get things, no matter what the reason is, does not make them inconsiderate or cheap or a moron.
Bikes were around alot longer than cars , to my knowledge. And last I heard , driving a motorized vehicle is a privilege, not a right! You should feel so lucky to live in a country where you have that privilege, as opposed to someplace where you have no choice but to walk everywhere and learn to balance things on your thick skull to get them home. Bet you'd appreciate cycling alot more then. I find it sad that some people just don't know how well they have it. As far as your friends, that are professionals  "wouldn't be spotted cycling away like a tard"... thats a real nice comment. Shows your true mentality and maturity level. I have a few professional friends that do bike to work regularly and quite sure you wouldn't call them a "tard" to their face. Always easy to type such things from the security of your PC though, I suppose.

Your holier than thou attitude is getting old & very unappreciated as well is the use of language and certain phrases, that I have had enough of editing your post. This is a family site and will be respected as such! Also your use of God is very disrespectful to those who have stronger religious beliefs. Your name calling ,though it is mostly indirectly, is uncalled for too, as some of us do find it offensive. Everyone is indeed entitled to their opinions here, regardless of the topic of the thread, but they are also required to be *clean *and *respectful*. It is apparent you find enjoyment in your post when it comes to putting people down and being on the negative side of topics as this post reflects and others that were closed because of your continuing to agitate certain things, sent them in a direction we don't approve of..... i'm sorry theres no other way to put it, but you are the inconsiderate person, when it gets down to it.
I understand you may find it difficult but please keep your comments clean and respectful of others!

No offense to the drivers out there, I have been quiet and neutral thru most all these threads no matter how I personally felt. Unfortunately as a mod I have to read thru these topics and see ignorant comments as such. Obviously not everyone will share the same opinions & this post hit a nerve, I am only human. I can see from both sides of this and agree with alot of things, but feel this particular post needed some attention. My apologies If I offended anyone in any way.



BaoBeiZhu said:


> cyclists are sometimes worst than c-lai drivers.. just sayin


not sure what you mean by worse, but I have to disagree. Even my cyclist disliking friends would disagree lol
There are far more worse drivers then then the total number of cyclist on these roads imho


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

This willbe my last response in this thread since its more of who can talk the loudest rather than a civil arguement.
I do not live in richmond. I do not deal with richmond traffic issues and i very rarely work at yvr like i do now. you just dont move somewhere and declare you are taking transit, it doesnt work that way. Im saying the system needs to be improved vastly and should be focused on that more than new bypasses and highway expansions. People wont stop driving thar is a given, no on argues that. Part of being a renter is being able to choose where you live, so using tansit means i can choose near a hub. It cuts out 20 to 30 minutes right there. The anxiety level comment was about fighting traffic and dealing with horriblw drivers and careless cyclists, i relax instead and just wait for my destination. i work in construction i carry my tools as needed i hop all over the vancouver and the inner suburbs for work, most of the time the trips arent horrible and are less than an hour. I have never had anything ive carried on a bus and skytrain prevent someone from sitting down so how does that make me inconsiderate. I am not trying to convince you to take transit, it woukd be hopeless since you resort to calling people morons or hippies who dont agree cars are the only way. So enjoy brow beating others in this subject so they one by one quiet down and you can atleast feel you have proof you are right

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I896 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

I understand why people ride bikes and take transit and in not against either. What I am against is removing vehicle lanes so that a few cyclists can ride back and forth 10 blocks and delay or reroute traffic, and then the Gregors of vancouver saying if I dont like it, I should ride a bike.... Sorry, not viable for my job... There were bikes on the road before, I dont know what the point of the barriers is.

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

Foxtail said:


> I understand why people ride bikes and take transit and in not against either. What I am against is removing vehicle lanes so that a few cyclists can ride back and forth 10 blocks and delay or reroute traffic, and then the Gregors of vancouver saying if I dont like it, I should ride a bike.... Sorry, not viable for my job... There were bikes on the road before, I dont know what the point of the barriers is.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


The reason we need separated bike lanes is to protect cyclists from cars and to encourage new bike riders (who might be scared of cars) to try cycling more.
I personally have no problem cycling around the city without dedicated cycling lanes, but I am nervous for the safety of my kids and other less experienced cyclists.

As the saying goes, there are two kinds of cyclists: those who have had an accident and those who have not had one...yet. With dedicated cycle lanes we can hopefully reduce the severity of accidents when they happen.

You are correct in your post to note that right now only a few cyclists would likely use new dedicated cycle routes. Again, that is where public policy can play a role by encouraging people (with various $$ incentives if need be) to start cycling more. If people's safety concerns are allayed through dedicated cycle routes then all the better.


----------



## J'sRacing (Apr 25, 2012)

Diztrbd1 said:


> might just be me, but seems as you really like to stir the pot 'eh? You really love these kinds of threads from the looks of things. An old saying comes to mind here...takes one......
> 
> Ya know...not everyone has a perfect life, where that they can afford to drive everywhere they go, let alone afford to even own a car. For that matter some cannot drive due to a physical impairments or something. I am a avid cyclist, mainly due to I have a crippled right ankle that impairs my ability to apply or reduce the proper pressure to the gas and brake pedals. Therefore I ride a bike. I can't say I have ever carried a tank home on it, but I have brought a couple home on the skytrain , without the bike. Luckily I also have friends who don't mind helping out and a time or 2 I hired someone to help move whatever. Just because someone is an avid cyclist and it's the main source of their transportation, or using public transit to get things, no matter what the reason is, does not make them inconsiderate or cheap or a moron.
> Bikes were around alot longer than cars , to my knowledge. And last I heard , driving a motorized vehicle is a privilege, not a right! You should feel so lucky to live in a country where you have that privilege, as opposed to someplace where you have no choice but to walk everywhere and learn to balance things on your thick skull to get them home. Bet you'd appreciate cycling alot more then. I find it sad that some people just don't know how well they have it. As far as your friends, that are professionals  "wouldn't be spotted cycling away like a tard"... thats a real nice comment. Shows your true mentality and maturity level. I have a few professional friends that do bike to work regularly and quite sure you wouldn't call them a "tard" to their face. Always easy to type such things from the security of your PC though, I suppose.
> ...


I understand where you are coming from as a moderator, but you are putting words into my mouth.

As far as i can see, having physical disabilities haven't stopped everyone from driving. There are work arounds. I mean for instance i drove manual with my left leg for 2 weeks when i sprained by right ankle badly!
Another idea
Hand Controls and Adaptive Driving Aids from VCI Mobility

The reason why i say taking big objects home on public transit is inconsiderate is because: well actually you know what, just take a big backpack and a couple of grocery bags on the 144 to SFU. See how many disgusted stares you'll get.

Reread my post, i've never said that being a avid cyclist makes you an inconsiderate or cheap moron.

And really i don't see how being able to drive in Vancouver is a "privilege", being able to drive in Hong Kong for example would be though, driving is for the most a luxury there. As far as professionals go, i'm not sure about you but if a professional like a lawyer or something came to see me in a bicycle, thats not going to garner any trust from me.

From the security of my PC? I'd say it to anyone infront of their face, if they thought that adding bike lanes and removing driving lanes were a good idea.

That is all. All i can say is i'm sure 99.9% of drivers have nearly run down a cyclist at some point in their driving career.


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

the saftey of inexpirienced riders is not a reason for the barriers. If cyclists were all taught the proper rules and edicate they wouldnt need a barrier to protect them... What happens when they leave the safety of their barrier? The barrier that was protecting them from their own ignorance... People like to be given a choice, they really dont like to be forced to do anything. The Gregors are trying to force bike usage upon people with the installation of the barriers and I(and I'm sure others) take offense to it. 

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Luke78 (Apr 24, 2010)

John,

Thank you for writing that out, been following this thread the last few days and was just in the process of writing something similar. Been noticing that ''holier than everyone attitude and the world revolves around me" to much lately in all areas of work,life,friends, and now here(quite surprised by this)! It sickens me and leaves a bad taste in my mouth! No place for it all!



Diztrbd1 said:


> might just be me, but seems as you really like to stir the pot 'eh? You really love these kinds of threads from the looks of things. An old saying comes to mind here...takes one......
> 
> Ya know...not everyone has a perfect life, where that they can afford to drive everywhere they go, let alone afford to even own a car. For that matter some cannot drive due to a physical impairments or something. I am a avid cyclist, mainly due to I have a crippled right ankle that impairs my ability to apply or reduce the proper pressure to the gas and brake pedals. Therefore I ride a bike. I can't say I have ever carried a tank home on it, but I have brought a couple home on the skytrain , without the bike. Luckily I also have friends who don't mind helping out and a time or 2 I hired someone to help move whatever. Just because someone is an avid cyclist and it's the main source of their transportation, or using public transit to get things, no matter what the reason is, does not make them inconsiderate or cheap or a moron.
> Bikes were around alot longer than cars , to my knowledge. And last I heard , driving a motorized vehicle is a privilege, not a right! You should feel so lucky to live in a country where you have that privilege, as opposed to someplace where you have no choice but to walk everywhere and learn to balance things on your thick skull to get them home. Bet you'd appreciate cycling alot more then. I find it sad that some people just don't know how well they have it. As far as your friends, that are professionals  "wouldn't be spotted cycling away like a tard"... thats a real nice comment. Shows your true mentality and maturity level. I have a few professional friends that do bike to work regularly and quite sure you wouldn't call them a "tard" to their face. Always easy to type such things from the security of your PC though, I suppose.
> ...


----------



## stratos (Apr 21, 2010)

Looks like more cycle lanes *ARE* coming:

Vancouver eyes bike lanes for Granville and Cambie bridges - British Columbia - CBC News

Whoo hoo!


----------



## josephl (Apr 21, 2010)

stratos said:


> Looks like more cycle lanes *ARE* coming:
> 
> Vancouver eyes bike lanes for Granville and Cambie bridges - British Columbia - CBC News
> 
> Whoo hoo!


Awesome, love it


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

<<headdesk on thread revival>>

Can we please ALL keep it civil on the thread this time around, folks? Opinions are fine, derogatory statements and personal attacks like we had earlier will get your post edited/deleted.

thanks!


----------



## Foxtail (Mar 14, 2012)

I think Gregor is working really hard on getting himself booted... Didnt they say no more bike lanes in the near future durring the last election? They also said the first ones were temporary trial bike lanes... Looked pretty permenant right from the start to me. What bothers me the most is that Gregor treats the city like it's his own personal yard and changes whatever he wants whenever he wants... Its getting old fast. There has been no public consultation... Why not put some effort into trying to make the feds keep the kits coastguard base open? Nope gotta put more effort into messing up traffic with more bike lanes.. :banghead:

Sent from my SGH-T959D using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Lamplighter (Aug 3, 2012)

Bikes and cars DO NOT mix IMO. Ontario Street (I know it is from 12th to 25th ) is a bike route and it's a narrow street that has to be shared with cars. Far too many bike-cyclists are not wearing helmets and they exceed the speed limit coming down from 25th to 16th on Ontario Street. Less than 50% wear helmets. I've seen two collisions at 18th and Ontario where cyclists were hospitalized.

I think that they should have to pay any medical expenses involving a head injury if they are not wearing a helmet. The same goes for Sikhs that have a religious exemption from wearing helmets.


----------



## IceBlue (Mar 17, 2011)

Lamplighter said:


> Bikes and cars DO NOT mix IMO. Ontario Street (I know it is from 12th to 25th ) is a bike route and it's a narrow street that has to be shared with cars. Far too many bike-cyclists are not wearing helmets and they exceed the speed limit coming down from 25th to 16th on Ontario Street. Less than 50% wear helmets. I've seen two collisions at 18th and Ontario where cyclists were hospitalized.
> 
> I think that they should have to pay any medical expenses involving a head injury if they are not wearing a helmet. The same goes for Sikhs that have a religious exemption from wearing helmets.


Here we go again. Time to give this forum a pass, too many posts like this that just needlessly aggrevate me.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

I think jogging is better than riding a bike. With biking you still need to find a place to park your bike which takes up precious space but with jogging you dont need nothing. It is super envirnomental and extremely healthy. 
Jogging existed long before bikes.
May be we should propose a jogging lane in downtown as well.
I think all those who bike are simply too lazy, why dont they all just jog! Being able to afford a bike is a priviliage and a luxury--we should just run and walk! 
Just hop off Canada Line and lets all run around in shorts! We would be steps ahead of Denmark. Best city in the world in terms of being green I would say, we would shame everyone else.
Leave 1 single lane for cars, 1 single lane for jogging and 1 single lane for bike--after all, who says car drivers have more right than bike riders or joggers!
Rickshaw is an alternative if you need to carry something big or heavy or if you have infants or whatever. Just use your legs and save our planets people! No more riding those bicycles! May be we should get one more lane for rickshaw as well come to think of it.


Note: in case someone thinks I am crazy, and before anyone calls me that or other names...this is my poor attempt at trying to lighten up the thread with my poor sense of humor.


----------

