HI all,
At the meeting yesterday we determined to approach three councillors with two basic objectives.
and a question for Adam ... Is there a way to fix that typo in the Topic Header?
Rob
I have booked the Big Little Science Centre
Looks like a very rough first pass on Hugh Allan at least from Sifton to Hwy 5a.
I'm good to go but I think we should confirm at 9am Sat with us meeting at 10:00 am.
Yeah, they are running through Aberdeen today. It was pretty weird on Hugh Allan, as you note it was as if they hit capacity as soon as they started and just rearranged the debris.
As of Thursday night it looks like they are around 90% done. Interesting that Pacific Way hasn't been done yet, just because it gets SOOO MUCH sand and gravel over the winter. Not a bike route of any value though.
The City just spent $3.4 million to add an extra turning lane onto Pacific Way. I believe the City is paying for all of that and some of it through long term debt. That is only one of a great many vehicle centred projects this year. So, yes your grand daughter is going to inherit debt but bike lanes aren’t going to be much of it.
There are issues with the 6th Avenue bike lane in that it can be argued that it is overbuilt. However, it isn’t an issue of not needing a bike lane, rather it really is an issue of connectivity which was much too casually dismissed by Mr. Johnson. We could argue 6th vs 5th Avenue forever, but really the problem is the bike path ending at Lansdowne. Council decided to not approve a bike lane on Lansdowne, noting it would remove a few centimetres of width from the vehicle lanes, so here we find ourselves. A road to nowhere until additional Active Transportation infrastructure is built out. That may happen when the Performing Arts Centre is built so don’t damage our options before that by spending a lot of money to remove the lane.
Cycling in Kamloops became a much more viable option for many with the rise of the eBike. It essentially flattens the city so the trail in Peterson Creek (Xget’tem Trail) isn’t just one way or limited to Tour de France cyclists. However, most people considering riding a bike, need to be separated from traffic to feel safe. It doesn’t help that cars are on average a foot wider than they were in 2013 and the F150 is longer that a World War 2 Sherman or Panzer tank. It doesn’t help that the average SUV driver can’t see a child in front of their car in a parking lot. It doesn’t help that the maximum legal speed limit isn’t even the minimum socially acceptable speed. Hence the need for separated bike lanes, and, YES, build a connected system and it will be used.
Regarding the quip about cyclists running red lights. The scale of this issue is a true urban myth, especially compared to drivers. Multiple studies have shown that cyclists break fewer laws than drivers and I am not aware of a study suggesting otherwise. One large study using cameras at intersections showed about 5% of cyclists breaking laws when on bike paths and 14% when not on bike paths. However, an earlier study showed that 66% of drivers were found to be breaking laws. The myth comes from bad driving behaviour being normalized and thus not noticed while bad behaviour from ‘others’ stands out.
Finally, we often say we want a ‘family friendly’ city. Don’t separated bike lanes move in that direction? Wouldn’t it be nice for a family to be able to cycle to City events or even for kids to cycle to school? Is that so bad?
I got this data from the literature but can't seem to find the reference. This also takes into account everything from expected life cycle to C02 emitted by the user (which is why walking does not come out so well). It is based on European average energy costs.
eScooter <10 gr CO2eppkm
eBike 14.8 gr CO2eppkm
regular bike 21 gr CO2eppkm
pedestrian 56 gr CO2eppkm
electric vehicle 90 gr CO2eppkm
bus 101 gr CO2eppkm
gas powered vehicle 200-266 gr CO2eppkm
There is no question that the default for the City is the Multiuse Path. It would require direction from Council to shift that thinking and KCC has been asking about how we might do that. While the new Active Transportation Plan notes the quick build infrastructure, I don't see that being the primary build unless the City Staff discover a way to make it zero cost and zero impact on road lanes and parking. We are a very low priority. Having said all that, there are situations when I would take a MUP over the current infrastructure. As crazy as it seems to have a MUP with high pedestrians and possibly high cyclist use going to TRU along McGill, the current situation is going to get someone (me?) killed sooner or later. Sooo many close calls ...
First, don't put in an MUP where an existing painted bike lane already exists (e.g., Valleyview). Go with the 'quick build' option that city Councillors liked that use curb barriers. Aside from the cyclist/pedestrian issues, moving cyclists further from the street encourages drivers to make right hand turns across the paths of cyclists at every cross street (signs indicating cyclists have right-of-way are good but drivers don't notice them). An MUP makes every intersection more dangerous. Where ever there is currently a painted bike lane, we need curb edging (quick build). Usage will greatly increase.
Second, when you get to the stage where you might be ready to draw up blueprints, check with cyclists (e.g., Kamloops Cycling Coalition) about the details. We USE these streets everyday and know the details and hazards. A check at this stage could improve safety by an order of magnitude (e.g., McGill/Columbia intersection ... current plan fails to address a major hazard and barrier to use that could be fixed with 50m project extension to the Frontage road accessing Starbucks).
Third, the AT gap between the Notre Dame/Summit intersection and McGill is a major barrier for AT access from Upper Sahali/Aberdeen to TRU.
Fourth, think about access to shopping so that AT can be used for more than just commuting.
Fifth, the need for AT access between ValleyView and Dallas is huge. A cyclist was killed just a few years ago using the highway to bridge this gap but all cyclists and pedestrians have absolutely no choice but to use the highway shoulder. I use this when I cycle out east and don't recommend it for anyone without experience.
Sixth, don't build a new MUP where a parallel residential/quiet road is readily accessible. e.g., Fortune vs Shubert. Take advantage of adjacent residential/quiet roads. Just add traffic calming such as speed bumps or better yet one direction access on each block for vehicles (e.g., St. Paul/Nicola). Residents love one direction access as it reduces traffic on their streets and makes it a joy to cycle. Kids can even play on the streets ... and it has to be cheaper by far.
