Took a ride along the temporary version of the Arbutus Greenway from 10th Ave to 37th Ave on Saturday, Sept 24. This Greenway will be, when completed, a treasure for the citizens of Vancouver for generations to come. I am delighted that this land will become a Greenway, hopefully for everyone, and not condos or a private park.
I did see that some likeable, if rudimentary, elements of design are already in place, and have been for ages. And these provide some small measure of connectivity. There are several informal pathways, of limited degrees of accessibility, that connect people to the Greenway from the surrounding ‘hood. Just as in Richmond, along the Railway Greenway. Mostly, though, these pathways limit Greenway accessibility through them to able-bodied walkers. I’d much rather see accessibility for all ages and abilities.
Also, the City has given some hints as to how the (surprisingly few) intersections of Greenway with motor-vehicle arterials may be handled. Today, people on the Greenway are directed a few metres (usually west) to the existing pedestrian crossings by bends and curves in the Greenway.
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Connectivity pathway for the able-bodied
-
- Temporary intersection treatment
Great pictures. Connectivity was a big theme in the Arbutus Greenway consultations I attended or read reports of.
As to intersections, borrowing an existing crosswalk, upgrading it to a crossbike with elephant feet, and using that while the permanent path is designed makes a lot of sense. Cost effective.
Here is how Richmond did it along the Railway Greenway.
http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q367/jcleigh/Posts/Railway%20Greenway%20intersection%20at%20Francis_zps5d4rce0p.jpg
Note that on Railway, people on bikes and people walking are not separated by a painted line. The centre line is to delineate the two directions, and all users follow that direction (keep right). The opposing “lane” is used for overtaking when it is clear, and is borrowed by groups that don’t fit abreast on one lane, whether walking or on bikes.
When the permanent Arbutus Greenway paths are designed and constructed, there are additional options. In some cases, it may make sense to continue with the ‘borrowed’ intersection crosswalk/crossbike. At others, grade separation may make sense, for people both walking and cycling.
The first photo is on the Corridor du Littoral, in Quebec City, last month. This 50 km path runs along the river, at this point parallel to the main road the sport cyclists are on. At this intersection, the Littoral was brought out to the main intersection. Note the faster cyclists are using the road, recreational and slower cyclists (whatever their clothing choices) are on the path. We were on the path, waiting to cross.
http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q367/jcleigh/Posts/Littoral%20Path%20intersection_zpscolfefhs.jpg
Where possible and practical, the Littoral includes grade separation, either an overpass or a tunnel. The centre line indicates the two directions, and along most of the path people can ride side by side. It is marked single file through the narrower tunnels and on the narrower overpasses.
http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q367/jcleigh/Posts/Littoral%20Path%20underpass_zpsvel5kxmu.jpg
There is a lot to learn from similar paths that have been successful for quite some time.
Oh right. One of the principles of a demonized minority. There are too many of them and not enough of them.
For temporary path, diversion to intersections may be OK, however for permanent path, there should be no diversion. In Richmond, they had a great opportunity to create Dutch style intersections where right turning motor vehicle traffic would cross greenway at right angles. This could work well for AG as well. Hopefully, we will have separate light phases for motor vehicles and active transportation. (protected intersection) as exists at Burrard/Cornwall.
The northeast corner of Quebec and 1st Ave in Vancouver has been built (at the same time as the adjacent condo construction) as the first corner of a Dutch style intersection.
And there are plans for a Dutch style intersection at Hornby & Pacific in Vancouver in conjunction with the condo tower on the former Umberto’s site.
As an aside – came across this video
– Arbutus corridor False Creek to 16th Ave. in 1982.
https://youtu.be/pWPmxSkI3K0
Edit- it’s labelled to 16th Ave. but goes past the Quilchena area.
Kind of a weird stop-motion video, but very interesting. It’s a great reminder of all the businesses along the RoW that once existed and relied on deliveries by rail.
In the 1970s we’d get stopped by a train at least once a month somewhere along the Arbutus corridor. My brother and I always hoped ours would be the first car stopped so we could watch the entire train go by. My dad knew that and sometimes when we could hear a train horn in the distance he’d deliberately slow down to increase the likelihood that he’d have to stop. Over the years the trains grew shorter and less frequent as trucking displaced railroad deliveries and heavy industries moved out of the city. Although I miss the trains I don’t miss inhaling the smell of big brewery beer production wafting over Connaught Park.
On Monday I did a “little” circle tour of cycling routes on the west side (later calculated by Google as 22.6km). Part of that was an exploration of the Arbutus path from King Edward south to 70th. I rode on the temporary path to 41st, switched to East Blvd to 64th and later crossed the path on SW Marine.
I wanted to examine the current state of the RoW, see it’s width, neighbouring uses, etc. I tried to ride a tiny bit of the undeveloped rail bed in Kerrisdale, but found so much broken glass mixed with the rocks that I went back to East Blvd.
Although rails may never return, one of the things I pondered was whether or not there is room for benches, pedestrians, cyclists and trams. Because I spent decades crossing the tracks (I think I traversed every level crossing that existed between 1970 and 2015 at least once and some of them hundreds of times) my bike tour was mostly an examination of nearby land use, something that has definitely changed a lot in the last 45 years. There are places where the railroad once had many parallel tracks with room to spare and there are places where land is at a premium and it would be a tight squeeze to accommodate a single track with appropriate separation from a walking path and cycling path.
I once again marvelled at how incredibly flat it feels. There really isn’t any route like it in Vancouver for getting to the top of a hill without feeling like you’ve ridden to the top of a hill.
That’s one of the great things about rails-to-trails projects like this, the gradient is so low. Biking north from Marine Drive to the “peak” around 34th is not even noticeable as a climb.