This week the Park Board placed big red jersey barriers to create S-curves on Park Drive on the steep downhill portion from Prospect Point. No notice, no explanation, but presumably to slow down cyclists, particularly where the Tatlow Trail crosses the road.
Download video here: IMG_5198 (1) – Stanley Park Chicane
Dianna has some thoughts:
Well, bless their hearts, after a couple of days observing that the bike slalom course they’d created on the Stanley Park downhill was dangerous, the Park Department has made the chicanes much more rideable. On Wednesday, each of the five chicanes forced cyclists descending Stanley Park Road into a tight S curve to squeeze between a pair of offset plastic barriers. Today, Saturday, the barriers were more widely spaced, so the curve to slide between them was much more gentle. No more squealing brakes or casual riders on the edge of control.
But if the point is to slow riders on the descent, forcing a mix of riders aged eight to eighty, casuals to road warriors into narrow gaps, makes little sense.. The descending road is a wide two lanes. Signs at the top warning of the descent, and advising slow riders to keep to the right, are all that’s needed to reduce or avoid conflicts.
The more urgent need is for signs that keep riders from riding the wrong way on the parks one-way roads. At the bottom of the hill, I met a dozen tourists wandering the wrong way, unsure where to go, and grateful when I got them turned around. There were others, worriedly descending the climb to Prospect Point like salmon swimming upstream. How had they gotten that far without figuring out their mistake? Lack of signs, could it be?
Closing Stanley Park roads to cars, so that walkers, runners and cyclists can exercise and enjoy nature at social distance, is wonderful. Very early last Wednesday, we came upon crews putting up the first barriers. I pointed out that one barrier blocked cyclists from exitIng the park to Beach Drive. As they moved it, they said that the changes were a work in process, and that they expected to make other changes.
But why do this by trial and error? Why not start with experienced consultants to design the best signage and traffic controls? Cyclists and city planners have complained for decades that the Park Board wants cyclists to ride to parks, but not through them. There are examples throughout Vancouver.
The coronavirus has changed that.
I rode Park Drive this past week before the chicane gates were changed, so will have to go back and see if they are safer now. What I experienced, though, was a motor vehicle overtaking me in the left lane (I was travelling at about 30 km/hr in the curb lane on the downhill), then moving to the right into my lane to navigate the chicanes. The width of the gates wasn’t the issue there, it was the existence of the choke point, and the fact that the vehicle driver ignored the sign indicating that the left lane ended ahead, merging as if both lanes were theirs.
The BC Active Transportation Design Guide was published in 2019 to assist local governments in designing best practice active transportation infrastructure. In Section E, walking and cycling paths (which Park Drive now is, essentially) they have the following caution:
“For pathways, current best practice is to avoid the use of rigid bollards or maze gates at pathway points of entry unless there is a demonstrated history of motor vehicle encroachment, and/or a collision history. The use of rigid bollards or maze gates (offset gates) for controlling speed of pathway users is also not appropriate, as the slowing effect is achieved by creating a potential safety hazard to the pathway users. Bollards and other obstructions placed within the operating space of a bicycle facility have been shown to present a significant injury risk to bicycle users.
Research Note
The Cyclists’ Injuries & the Cycling Environment (BICE) study conducted for the Cycling in Cities Program at the University of British Columbia found that 12% of all cycling injury collisions requiring emergency room treatment were a result of impacts with infrastructure such as bollards, street furniture, curbs, fences, speed bumps, or stairs. ”
Seems clear. The Park Board should take out the maze gates. It may have been well-intentioned, but they are a danger. And add a few signs noting that Park Drive is still a one way route.
I’d be in favour of signing and allowing two-way cycling on the park drives. The grade up to Prospect Point from 2nd beach is a lot more “All Ages and Abilities” friendly than the one from Lumberman’s Arch.
Notwithstanding the design concerns, I’d suspect that the chicanes may have also been installed to make crossing Park Drive easier for pedestrians using the park’s forest trails. With a broad mix of cyclists, and speeds, I’d expect it would be hard for many walkers to judge when a reasonable gap to cross was available. Never mind that cyclists should be stopping at the marked crosswalks if they are occupied. Maybe some channelisation into multiple, shorter crossings, with a mid-street refuge, would assist?
The Park Board has always seemed challenged with traffic control – frequently confusing the use of lane control signs (light grey arrow on black background – “if you are in this lane, you must turn, or proceed, in the direction of the arrow”) with intersection control signs (arrow in a green circle on a white background – “ “if you are approaching this intersection, no matter which lane you are in, you must turn, or proceed, in the direction of the arrow.”)
Another possibility is to make Stanley Park Drive two way.
I’ve appreciated those barricades on the hill for slowing down cars. Cyclists can get through easily without braking. There are still cars in the park– work/service vehicles and for some reason fancy SUVs I suspect getting out from the yacht club (and naval base?), although I don’t know why they can’t peel off at pipeline road.
Oh, and in The After, allow only one lane of car traffic through the park. People who can’t ride or walk should be able to access the park hinterlands, but there is absolutely no need for two lanes of car traffic. Traffic would go as fast as the slowest driver, frustrating fast drivers. Yes!