Burrard Bridge – One more time

My Business in Vancouver column on an old favourite …

Bridging the transportation gap requires experimenting with the status quo

It might be asking too much, but it would be nice if we could avoid a culture war over the Burrard Bridge.

Yes, I know, cyclists can seem like terrible scolds, but that’s because they’re irritatingly fit and lean and still have hair.

Motorists have every reason to be frustrated: so much power at the push of a pedal, so little opportunity to use it.

They don’t need a metaphorical (or real) finger in the face when they’re just trying to get to work.

Instead, let’s take the advice of Niels Tørsløv, the traffic director of Copenhagen: “try things out.” Some will work, some won’t, but you won’t really know until you try.

It’s not as if Vancouver hasn’t been through this before.

We were the first to introduce traffic calming in North America in the West End, not without conflict. Some may remember the Battle of Shaughnessy in the early ’80s when short-cutting traffic was discouraged, much to the complaint of those who believed they were entitled to use the roads they had helped pay for. After a successful trial, the changes went in. Life went on, and the traffic moved.

Anyway, there’s no status quo with regard to the Burrard Bridge.

The current arrangements won’t do: mixing cyclists and pedestrians on a narrow sidewalk is too unsafe, at least to satisfy the courts if the city has to explain why, in a previous settlement with a cyclist who fell into traffic, it didn’t make changes after promising to do so.

Traffic is changing, too. Since the mid-1990s, the number of moving vehicles in the downtown core has been dropping and will continue to do so when the Canada Line starts operating.

In other words, there’s room available to rearrange some reasonable amount of road space, just as other cities are doing.

New York City, for instance, is closing off five blocks of Broadway through Times Square to vehicles this month and building separated bike lanes down some of its major avenues and many of its cross streets.

New York also has the same advice as Copenhagen. Janette Sadik-Khan, the NYC traffic commissioner, says the secret of success is the pilot project. Lay down some paint, put in some temporary barriers and see how it works.

Remember, the Burrard Bridge trial is not a permanent solution, regardless of the results of the current experiment.

The Vision council chose an option that can’t be used for the final configuration. Other arrangements will still have to be considered.

So in the end, no matter what, the bridge will change. And whatever is ultimately agreed upon, it should be safe, comfortable and practical for all users, including the driver and transit passenger.

We can probably get general agreement on the “safe” part, but let’s not forget “comfort.”

Walking across the Burrard Bridge deserves to be a small celebration of life in Vancouver.

A place where your eye is on the view, not what’s coming up behind.

A place where it’s OK to take a child along without having to worry whether she will take a step in the wrong direction.

Where a photographer can take a step backward to frame a picture. Where two or three friends can walk side by side.

This is a city that so loves its views that it designed its best bridge with lovely arches and balconies, with sidewalks that were designed for strolling, not for territorial conflict.

It also designed the bridge to allow for streetcars to be accommodated on a separate level below the road deck.

That’s why there are very large holes in the bridge’s piers, one on each side of False Creek, perfect for a low-level crossing that would ideally serve walkers and cyclists who simply want to get from seawall to seawall, connecting with bikeways already in place.

The problem is that the federal government controls access to the creek and is not likely to accept any crossing that won’t allow for boats with masts to pass through at high tide.

There are technical solutions, but they’re expensive, and so far considered impractical.

Hence, a low-level passerelle, as the French call small bridges, has been ruled out, even though they’re being built all over the world as iconic structures.

But depending on how the trial turns out, practicality may prove to be more flexible than currently assumed.

It depends on whether we really want to find a solution or fight a war over contested space. •