Frances Bula header image 2

Vancouver bike-news day: Bike-share contract reached; plan for Point Grey Road laid out

July 18th, 2013 · 169 Comments

Oh brother, here we go, the bike debates.

But can’t avoid it, as that seems to be the week’s news.

Here’s my story on the city report re agreement with Alta Bicycle Share on the new public-bike share system. Still some news to come on this, as we don’t know who the sponsors will be. Deputy city manager Sadhu Johnston told me it won’t be one big sponsor, like in London or New York, as we don’t have those kinds of companies. And he only laughed when I suggested it might be a joint Lululemon/Hootsuite sponsorship.

Other news in the report is that the first stage of the system will only include downtown and the Kits/Mount Pleasant area from Arbutus to Main, up to 12th. Even though Commercial Drive routinely appears as one of the city’s most cyclingest neighbourhoods, apparenlty Alta said that there was too much dead space between there and the central city to make bike stations workable. The city wasn’t about to insist because it didn’t want Alta saying the system failed because they were forced to put in stations in unworkable places.

I noticed on Twitter this has already provoked some disappointed responses. Did seem like an ideal spot at the overloaded Broadway/Commercial station to have a big dock there, allowing at least some of those beleaguered commuters to take a bike rather than wait for another overstuffed 99B. However, who knows how popular the system will be and how it might expand.

In other bike news, the city held a briefing outlining the plan for the Point Grey bike route yesterday. Stories here and here.

 

Published Wednesday, Jul. 17, 2013 11:21PM EDT

 

Last updated Thursday, Jul. 18, 2013 10:00AM EDT

 

The city that prides itself on its cycling culture is finally set to hop onto the saddle of the biggest urban trend of the century: a public bike-share system.

Vancouver has finalized an agreement for Alta Bicycle Share Inc. in Portland, Ore., to roll out a first stage of the system in the fall, using Montreal’s Bixi bikes, with a $6-million contribution from the city. It will have 1,500 bikes and 125 stations in operation by the spring.

Alta will also install the continent’s first helmet-dispensing system to address the province’s helmet laws, which have been a hurdle for the past three years. Only two other cities – Sydney and Melbourne in Australia – are known to require helmets for bike-share users.

The Alta/Bixi system is being used for bike-share operations that launched recently in New York and Chicago.

The news has prompted excitement from the city’s avid cycling community, and some wariness from those who fear financial problems or a negative impact on local bike-rental companies.

But the city’s deputy manager said Vancouver learned from other cities about the best way to avoid getting into a financial mess.

Unlike Toronto, which provided a loan guarantee to get its bike-share operation going, Vancouver will shell out $6-million up front and provide staff to support the system. It is also going to give up revenue as some parking meters near bike stations will no longer be in use. But Alta will be on the hook for everything else, Sadhu Johnston said.

“Alta owns the system. They’re liable,” Mr. Johnston said. “Then if the numbers aren’t working, it’s their responsibility. It’s enabling and regulating rather than owning and operating.”

A report on the proposed system that goes to council next Tuesday also recommends that no bike-share stations be set up within 50 metres of private bike-rental stores.

Cities have experimented with bike-share systems – which allow people to rent a bike for brief periods – since the 1970s. But the idea really took off after Paris created the Vélib system in 2007. The distinctive grey bikes and docking stations are now ubiquitous in the city.

More than 500 cities, from London to Mexico City to Hangzhou in China, have bike-share systems that range in size from a few hundred bikes to 60,000.

Some have pooh-poohed the idea of a bike-share system in Vancouver, saying the city is too hilly and too rainy.

But others point to the dramatic increase in cycling in recent years as the city has moved aggressively to put separated bike lanes downtown and enhanced cycling routes elsewhere.

City councillor George Affleck, who is in the minority Non-Partisan Association, said he is in favour of bike-share systems.

But, he said, he does not understand why Vancouver is putting in so much money, when New York got a sponsor to cover all $41-million of its costs.

He said he is glad the money will come from the city’s parking reserve instead of being added to tax bills, but he thinks the city could have found more partners to help with the costs.

Mr. Johnston said that Alta is lining up sponsors to cover half of the remaining $15-million in costs for the system. Those deals are being finalized and will be announced later. However, Vancouver is unlikely to get a single sponsor, the way New York or London did.

“It’s been quite difficult identifying sponsors. We don’t have the same kinds of headquarters.”

The city is still deciding on a name, colour and logo for the bikes.

It is also allowing Alta to limit its coverage in the early years to downtown, plus parts of Kitsilano and Mount Pleasant, bounded by 12th Avenue, Arbutus and Main streets. That means no stations for the heavily used Commercial/Broadway station, or Commercial Drive, which is popular with cyclists.

Mr. Johnston said Alta determined the industrial area between Commercial Drive and downtown did not have enough density to support bike stations all the way there.

 

 

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Threadkiller

    @Chris Keam #132:
    “…Cyclists are not a significant danger to any road user group”.

    Oh, hell, the usual BS from the PR machine. Mr. K, I once again invite you to get off your bike and spend a few days walking around this city with me before you emit such self-serving twaddle. Perhaps you’d like to have a little talk with the mother of the six-year-old girl who narrowly missed– by about six inches– being run down by a speeding cyclist last night on the False Creek South seawall at Charleson Park. Pedestrians were thronging the seawall, it being a fireworks night, while idiots on bikes were weaving in and out among them at speeds that defied anything remotely resembling common sense. Both the kid and her mother had a bad scare, but the cyclist just kept on going, trying to catch up with his half-dozen buddies. I walk at least four miles a day in this city, year-round. I see this kind of shit almost every single day, on bridges, on downtown sidewalks, in crosswalks, on seawalls, anywhere everywhere. I wish to hell I didn’t. Cyclists in this city are an unregulated force. As such, they represent a continual potential danger to pedestrians everywhere, and yet guys like you consistently defend them with the cyclists’s stonewall of moral superiority– “We’re helping to save the environment!!” Well, hurray for you. Good cause. But until a clear majority of this city’s cyclists develop a sense of collective responsibility, stay the hell off the sidewalks, and show some awareness that a 170-pound human on a 30-pound bike travelling 20 MPH is a potentially lethal weapon, I will not offer one iota of support for any pro-bicycle venture in this city. To do so would only help to put myself and people I care about– vulnerable people, the elderly– in danger. My wife was recently diagnosed with spinal osteoporosis and has been warned to avoid falls of any kind; can you imagine what could have happened had one of those speeding SOBs on the seawall last night knocked her down, or even just caused her to lose her balance?

    I don’t expect anything I’ve said here to mean anything to you. But damn it, you and your fellow cyclists need to remember that “alternative transportation” is a many-faceted concept. And right now, two of its primary facets are at irreconcilable odds. Someone is going to have to give up some ground. And it ain’t gonna be me.

  • teririch

    @gman #148:

    Don’t you just love being part of a science experiment without being told.

    Damn us Vancouverrites that won’t play nicely and follow the leader.

    And I do love how Johnston keeps saying “We spent millions on this ad campaign……”

    Just great.

  • gman

    teririch,
    Like the low level maggots Suzuki called us,only we live in those wonderful green waste recycle containers flourishing in the summer sun.
    And lets not forget where this guy came from,right out of that gem of a city Chicago the next city after Detroit that will declare bankruptcy.

  • Frank Ducote

    CK – I’m sorry, but I have to agree with TK@151 on this one. My biggest safety concern when I am out walking in downtown Vancouver these days is bikers. Much more than drivers, whom I can usually figure out what they’re going to do and react accordingly. Not so with far too many bikers, who will run over your feet, or worse, on sideWALKS, on the Seawall and in crosswalks.

    I wish it weren’t so, but it is. The first mobility priority in the City is often left out of the picture, IMO.

  • teririch

    @gman #153

    I had to laugh when this ‘huge’ revelation came about – maggots in food bins during summer. (Go figure)

    Last year at this time, the apartment buildng where I live was swamped by maggots courtesy of the food bins at the restaurant next door. There were 1,000’s of them.

    I came down the one morning to the back entrance/exit way and one of the strata council members was coming in. The carpet in the area was moving as was a good foot of the wall space. It took us both a few seconds to realize what the hell we were looking at.

    Our building is older and ‘settling’ so there was a gap between the door jam and the pavement and these things crawled in.

    Long and short – it took the exterminator 6 sprayings before we got rid of them all.

    I walked into the laundry room the one morning (after the hallway was cleared) and it was like carnage from Lord of the Flies…. Tiny dead black flies all over the place. I walked in, looked, walked out…

    Funny enough – I tweeted it out and Cllr Reimer had a go at me about it. She couldn’t understand how this happened, what had changed etc…. I had taken pictures of the areas inside and outside of our building.

    It is not rocket science – leave a piece of meat or a tin of cat/dog food out for 48 hours in warm weather and see what you end up with.

  • teririch

    @gman #153:

    Not to mention he, Sadhu Johnston, got married at Hollyhock.

  • Chris Keam

    @Threadkiller:

    “and yet guys like you consistently defend them with the cyclists’s stonewall of moral superiority– “We’re helping to save the environment!!”

    You presume much, and most of it is wrong. You see, if you wanted to find a cyclist who is regularly and consistently calling out cyclists for reckless riding, I’m your guy. Just ask my kid, who is probably sick to death of me chastising two-wheeled idiots on the Seawall (a regular walk for me as well donchaknow?) and sidewalks of the city. And I’m certainly not making the environmental claims you put in my mouth.

    Finally, you can support cycling initiatives or not. But to refuse to do so because of the current situation is cutting off your nose to spite your face. That’s your prerogative. But I will thank you not to make this assumptions about me, my position on pedestrian safety, or what role I think cycling can play in ‘saving the environment’. Because you are pretty much completely wrong on every count. And frankly, because my contact info is easily available and I’m more than happy to discuss the topic like a grown-up, your decision to judge first, without the slightest attempt to find out what I really think isn’t exactly the kind of behaviour that makes me want to help you deal with this issue. Nope, I’ll keep doing what I’m doing, according to my own principles, in the way that I feel is most effective.

    thanks,

    CK

  • Chris Keam

    @Frank Ducote

    Have you actually had your feet run over?

    cheers,

    CK

  • Threadkiller

    Mr. Keam:
    OK, fine, I’ve misrepresented you, you’re on the side of the angels on this issue and doing your bit to solve the problem, and the sun will shine in the morning. Whatever. Hey, I’d love to think that somebody out there is doing *something*, even if it’s just one saintly guy. But I would like to know: What kind of reaction do you get when you “chastise” those “two-wheeled idiots” (and there are so very many to choose from…)? Do you address them in a secret cyclist’s code-speak that causes them to guiltily hang their heads and meekly accept a rebuke from an elder of their clan? Or do they give you the finger and keep going, or, as sometimes happens, stop dead and threaten you with unspecified physical violence? ‘Cause these are the kinds of responses I get when I try to do what you say you do. Like your son, my wife gets very antsy when I verbally engage an irresponsible cyclist. She doesn’t like me to get into confrontations, and I can’t say I like it myself. Perhaps I speak too roughly to the little darlings; when they pass you so fast you tend to react by shouting the first thing that pops into your head, often, in my case, variations on “Slow the f**k down!!”; or maybe it’s just that, as a pedestrian, I am clearly not one of their fraternity (it’s almost always men who are the morons– testosterone, I assume), and as such am not entitled to comment on their riding behaviour. Hence their reactions, I suppose. Fuelled by adrenaline… So what tactics do you employ? And do they work? Any tips?

    PS: You want me to take time to find out what you really think? Then don’t go so quickly into circle-the-wagons-and-start-shooting mode every time someone offers even a mild critique of cycling behaviour (I exclude my admittedly angry response above). It so convincingly makes you part of the problem that it’s hard to take you seriously when you claim to be part of the solution.

  • gman

    Threadkiller,
    Frustrating aint it,its like trying to deal with tweens,their never wrong and its all your fault.They do everything they can to try and steer the conversation away from the subject at hand,kinda like three card monte,keep your eye on the pea or you will get bamboozled.
    I bet CK and Richard have been holed up on a couch somewhere with their tablets clutched in in their sweaty little hands monitoring every blog in town making sure nobody is actually discussing the problems nor solution’s of the real subject.

  • IanS

    @CK #158 (and further to @Frank Ducote #154):

    “Have you actually had your feet run over?”

    I can’t answer for Frank, of course, but I have had my feet run over a couple of times, usually as I stumble away to avoid being hit by a bike. I’ve been narrowly missed by bikes on a number of occasions, though never actually been struck head on.

    I’ll echo Frank’s observations. As a full time pedestrian in this city, my experience is that bikes are a much more significant “in your face” concern due to their unpredictability, much more so than cars.

    I don’t suggest that cyclists are inherently more reckless than drivers; simply that some cyclists seem to feel that they are unbound by any rules of the road.

    (I have to say also that your post #99 gave me a chuckle, though. If motorists drove like cyclists, even at 15-20 MPH, I doubt I’d make it to work alive.)

    And, before this devolves into a slanging match, I note, from your post #157, that you feel strongly about cyclists following the rules etc. I don’t mean to suggest that you are reckless or unsafe in your cycling.

    I just wanted to provide a pedestrian’s perspective, and to echo Frank’s comments.

  • Chris Keam

    @IanS

    I am also a pedestrian. I get it. I understand that there’s an issue. But the rationale that better infrastructure for cyclists should be contingent upon something approaching 100% compliance with road rules by scofflaws is both unrealistic and unfeasible. Yet it is a running theme in these debates.

    I would happily devote some of my time to working with the City and the VPD on addressing this issue of inconsiderate cyclists, but it seems I spend a lot of my efforts having to dispel outright lies and character attacks by a few anonymous folks who feel I have a ve$ted interest in promoting cycling. Frankly, it costs me money in the long run. When will the sensible people who post here and elsewhere decide that they will not stand by when that happens? I mean let’s face it, Threadkiller shits all over me and then asks why I won’t wipe his ass? Gee I wonder.

  • IanS

    @CK #162:

    “But the rationale that better infrastructure for cyclists should be contingent upon something approaching 100% compliance with road rules by scofflaws is both unrealistic and unfeasible. ”

    I agree.

    In fact, if I thought that the bike lane infrastructure was resulting in an improvement in cyclist behavior downtown, I’d consider that an argument supporting the infrastructure.

    Unfortunately, at least in my experience, that hasn’t been the case.

  • Chris Keam

    “if I thought that the bike lane infrastructure was resulting in an improvement in cyclist behavior downtown, I’d consider that an argument supporting the infrastructure. ”

    Can you think of any examples of civic infrastructure changes that brought about an near-immediate change in human behaviour? Especially one that came without any concerted education efforts on the part of government?

    I would note that roughly a hundred years after the wide-spread adoption of the automobile, we are still seeing education campaigns regarding sensible driving… and those campaigns are, to some extent, finally bearing some small, stunted fruit. By what logic do we expect this time to be different?

  • IanS

    @CK #164:

    “By what logic do we expect this time to be different?”

    I don’t. That’s my point.

    (I’m not suggesting that the lack of improvement in cyclist behavior is a reason to oppose the bike lanes. My point was that, if there had been an improvement, I would consider that a point for them. But, alas…)

  • Chris Keam

    My feeling is that it’s a bit early for a final judgement of the outcome.

  • Frank Ducote

    “Have you actually had your feet run over?”

    CK – this flip remark does you no credit whatsoever. Am I supposed to wait for it to happen before I have a right to complain about such misbehaviour on sidewalks and other parts of the pedestrian or shared realm?

    Get over your self-righteousness, buddy.

    Worse than toes, I’ve nearly been driven into at speed by bikers who hug the painted line dividing them from the pedestriaan part of the Science World end of the SeaWall. Again, near misses. So far.

    None of this, however, deters me from genrally supporting more bike infrastructure if, for no other reason, perhaps the biking culture will mature so that the numerous infractions and risky behaviour is reduced.

  • Chris Keam

    Actually Frank, it was not a flip remark. I was simply wondering if there was an actual incident you were referring to? I think you’ve taken offense where absolutely none was intended.

  • Bill Lee

    With the troubles of the Toronto Bike-Share, the Globe and Mail put it to their Globe-Debate pages.

    Home» Globe Debate

    Toronto’s bike-share program: Who should pay?
    by Staff

    The Globe and Mail
    Published Wednesday, Dec. 04 2013, 2:31 PM EST
    Last updated Wednesday, Dec. 04 2013, 2:52 PM EST
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/municipal-bike-sharing-who-should-pay/article15763169/#dashboard/follows/

    Globe contributor Ivor Tossell and Candice Malcolm of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation square off on the issue.
    9 comments