Difference between revisions of "Current Public Consultations"

From committees
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(41 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:
 
<br/><br/>
  
<br/><br/>
   
  +
==[https://www.dnv.org/streets-transportation/mountain-highway-safety-improvements Central Mountain Hwy Safety improvements (Arborlynn to Lynn Valley Road)]==
−
==[https://dnv.civilspace.io/en/projects/lynn-valley-road-active-transportation-phase-2/engagements/150 '''Upper Lynn Valley Road - Peters to Dempsey''']==
  
−
* Continuing the Safety improvements including bikelanes, that were installed on Lynn Valley Rd between the Town Centre (Mtn Hwy) and Peters Rd in 2022.
 +
* Safety improvements including bikelanes, sidewalks and improved crossings.
−
**Open House - Thursday, May 26, 3:30pm - 7:30pm, Karen Magnussen Community Recreation Centre, Eagle Room
+
**Open House - Thursday, Oct-12th, 6-8pm, Karen Magnussen Community Recreation Centre, Eagle Room
−
* [https://dnv.civilspace.io/en/projects/lynn-valley-road-active-transportation-phase-2/engagements/150 Link to the Survey] now open until June 5th, 2023 (~10 mins, 6 webpages with mostly multiple choice)
 +
* [https://dnv.civilspace.io/en/projects/mountain-highway-safety-improvements/engagements/mountain-highway-safety-improvements-part-two/sections/1 Link to the Survey] now open until Oct 24th, 2023 (~5 mins, 6 webpages with mostly multiple choice)
 
________________
  
________________
 
*'''Some things you may want to consider when completing the survey''':
  
*'''Some things you may want to consider when completing the survey''':
  +
**On the 5th page, '''Ross Rd to E 27th Street''' regarding the - Bikelane southbound + MUP northbound
−  
  +
***The Bikelanes should be protected where possible. Plastic posts in the buffer on segments without Driveways, and the Upper Lynn Valley Rd design where there are driveways.
−
*'''Priorities:'''
  
  +
***Prefer to see a sidewalk plus a separate protected bike lane on the East side. Busy Multi-User Paths not comfortable for either people walking or on bikes - especially with the continued growth of ebikes.
−
*** 1. Safety for people should be a higher priority than parking.
  
−
*** 2. Ungap the map = A connected network of routes to access all the places safely, quickly, and efficiently for people walking, and people on bikes - at least as connected a network - if not more so - than for people in cars.
 +
***The Bike lanes need to be extended all the way past Ross Rd to join the existing bike lanes on Lynn Valley Road, Otherwise there will be a one block "Gap" that is not comfortable for most people on Bikes.
  +
**'''Whiteley Crt to E18th'''
−
***3. While the concept of balance is important. The past 100 years of car-focused development and people walking and people riding bikes shunted to small sections of public-right-of-way demonstrates there is a lot of space to be returned to people walking, people on bikes, and transit - than is currently occupied by car & truck use. So true balance, will not hesitate to take space from car & truck use, as we are currently so out-of-balance.
  
  +
***Option 1 provides more comfort for both people walking and on bikes. Ensure the bikes lanes are wide enough to allow passing.
−  
  +
***On block or segments with no driveways the Bikelanes on the west side should be protected with plastic posts in the buffer. (North & south of 24th, power line crossing, ...)
−  
  +
***On segments with driveways the west side bikelanes should use the Upper Lynn Valley design.
−
*'''Cycling Options 1, 2, & 3'''
  
  +
**'''East 18th Street to Arborlynn Drive'''
−
** ''Draft1: We feel that all 3 Cycling options are quite usable.''
  
  +
*** We think both should be implemented - and at the very least - 14th to 18th requires protected bike lanes. In our comments we noted that this was a 'false choice' and requested both. A direct, but busy route for the confident people on bikes - especially on the downhill. The quieter route is important for the less confident people on bikes (“Interested but concerned”)
−
*** Option 1 is most direct but will remove heavily used parking, pushing congestion into the neighbourhood. (DW: this is not necessarily the case. Traffic "evaporates" when it is less useful than other modes)
  
  +
*** We recommend selecting Option 1 in the choices, since that is all that is allowed by the choices. Some additional comments:
−
*** Option 2 is almost as direct but preserves the most heavily used parking. Cycling along Kilmer park will be nicer than along LV Rd. The crossing at Kilmer Rd needs to be safe.
  
  +
***Option 1 - Mtn Hwy - slightly less steep, but next to heavy traffic
−
*** Option 3 Hoskins (southbound) is a much quieter road, nicer to ride along. This route also provides some bikelanes on Dempsey (an official bike route, but fairly lightly used and a relatively low priority one)
 
  +
****Ensure the bikelanes are protected from traffic, and with concrete barriers at the sharp corners
−
** Other Ideas?
  
  +
****The bikelanes should be wide enough to permit passing, especially uphill.
−
*__
  
  +
***Option 2 - Neignbourhood bikeway on E18th, Appin, Arbourlynn - bit steeper, much quieter.
−
*__
  
  +
****Protected bikelanes on both sides of Arbourlynn with separated sidewalk. Busy Multi-User Paths are not comfortable for people walking or on bikes. Bi-directional bike paths on one side of bi-directional streets are a well known hazard.
−
**''Draft2: We prefer Option 1: Lanes both sides of Lynn Valley Road.''
  
  +
****Consider a connection along Appin, up 20th, along Viewlynn to E27th. This would provide an alternative, quiet neighbourhood bikeway all the way to Lynn Valley Town Centre.
−
***Our 2nd choice is Option 3: One-way loop
  
−
***Our 3rd choice is Option 2: with the MUP (Mutli-use Pathway) through Kilmer park
  
−
*Comments on the route choices:
  
−
**We prefer the most obvious to the most people and most direct route, as it will result in the least confusion - even with wayfinding signage.
 
−
***If Option 2 allowed space for a bus lane that bypassed vehicle traffic, that would be a reasonable reason to go with Option 2.
 
−
***The steepness of the downhill on Hoskins would require:
  
−
**** 1. Options for confident cyclists to exit and re-enter the protected lane.
  
−
**** 2. Signage that says "Cyclist may use full lane" to reduce agression from vehicle drivers thinking "a person on a bike should be in the bike lane"
  
−  
−  
−  
−
*'''Sidewalks:'''
 
−
**We support all the additional sidewalks proposed.
  
−
**Intersection improvements:
 
−
***We support all the improvements to the crossings. The raised intersection at LV Road and Dempsey is particularly worthwhile. Excellent proposal.
  
−
***We suggest making the crossings level at grade as this will improve access for people walking and people with mobility challenges, as well as help control traffic speed on this downhill stretch that often sees cars & trucks exceed the posted limit significantly.
  
−  
−
*'''Bus Stop improvements:'''
 
−
** support all of the bus stop amenity improvements.
  
−
**We believe good bus routes, and as frequent as possible buses during peak times - such as every 5 minutes - will support the best alternative access to this busy park for all metro vancouver. More bus traffic is the best chance for reducing car traffic on this route, improving safety for those living, walking, biking, _and driving_ on this route.
  
−
**Pay attention to the safety and convenience of crossings to access the bus routes both on LV road and to Underwood Ave.
  
−  
−
*'''Dovercourt intersection improvements:'''
  
−
**We prefer option 2.
  
−
**Comments:
 
−
***Option 1 creates a complicated intersection with many options and flows. It's a potentially high-speed pinch point for people in cars, on bikes, on the downhill. As most crashes and injuries occur at intersections, I strongly advise going with the simpler design of Option 2. This also will reduce car/truck traffic on Dovercourt, improving it as an alternative and local community route to Kilmer park.
 
−
***Dovercourt is already a preferred route many take from from north of Lynn Valley Centre to Kilmer Park and End of the line.
  
−  
−
<br/>
  

Latest revision as of 19:23, 10 October 2023

Public input is critical when Council and Staff make trade-offs and decisions.
Please make sure your voice is heard!!
The Section titles below are linked to the surveys.

Central Mountain Hwy Safety improvements (Arborlynn to Lynn Valley Road)

  • Safety improvements including bikelanes, sidewalks and improved crossings.
    • Open House - Thursday, Oct-12th, 6-8pm, Karen Magnussen Community Recreation Centre, Eagle Room
  • Link to the Survey now open until Oct 24th, 2023 (~5 mins, 6 webpages with mostly multiple choice)

________________

  • Some things you may want to consider when completing the survey:
    • On the 5th page, Ross Rd to E 27th Street regarding the - Bikelane southbound + MUP northbound
      • The Bikelanes should be protected where possible. Plastic posts in the buffer on segments without Driveways, and the Upper Lynn Valley Rd design where there are driveways.
      • Prefer to see a sidewalk plus a separate protected bike lane on the East side. Busy Multi-User Paths not comfortable for either people walking or on bikes - especially with the continued growth of ebikes.
      • The Bike lanes need to be extended all the way past Ross Rd to join the existing bike lanes on Lynn Valley Road, Otherwise there will be a one block "Gap" that is not comfortable for most people on Bikes.
    • Whiteley Crt to E18th
      • Option 1 provides more comfort for both people walking and on bikes. Ensure the bikes lanes are wide enough to allow passing.
      • On block or segments with no driveways the Bikelanes on the west side should be protected with plastic posts in the buffer. (North & south of 24th, power line crossing, ...)
      • On segments with driveways the west side bikelanes should use the Upper Lynn Valley design.
    • East 18th Street to Arborlynn Drive
      • We think both should be implemented - and at the very least - 14th to 18th requires protected bike lanes. In our comments we noted that this was a 'false choice' and requested both. A direct, but busy route for the confident people on bikes - especially on the downhill. The quieter route is important for the less confident people on bikes (“Interested but concerned”)
      • We recommend selecting Option 1 in the choices, since that is all that is allowed by the choices. Some additional comments:
      • Option 1 - Mtn Hwy - slightly less steep, but next to heavy traffic
        • Ensure the bikelanes are protected from traffic, and with concrete barriers at the sharp corners
        • The bikelanes should be wide enough to permit passing, especially uphill.
      • Option 2 - Neignbourhood bikeway on E18th, Appin, Arbourlynn - bit steeper, much quieter.
        • Protected bikelanes on both sides of Arbourlynn with separated sidewalk. Busy Multi-User Paths are not comfortable for people walking or on bikes. Bi-directional bike paths on one side of bi-directional streets are a well known hazard.
        • Consider a connection along Appin, up 20th, along Viewlynn to E27th. This would provide an alternative, quiet neighbourhood bikeway all the way to Lynn Valley Town Centre.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.bikehub.ca/index.php?title=Current_Public_Consultations&oldid=15050"