Frances Bula header image 2
← →

What changes has the city made to the intersection at Pacific and Burrard to make it safer?

July 24th, 2012 · 19 Comments

Dear blog collaborators, especially those who bike/drive Burrard more regularly than I.

Someone sent me this question. Can you answer it?

I had a bike crash July 20, 2012 at Burrard and Pacific. I was knocked out and taken to SPH.  What has the city done since your May 28th piece mentioned COV was planning on making it harder for cars to turn right there?

“A Vancouver effort to make pedestrians safer is thinking outside the crosswalk box”
May 28th, 2012
…..”cars, in spite of signs telling them they couldn’t, were still trying to turn right from Burrard onto Pacific. The city is making an adjustment to that corner to make it much harder for a car to turn right, which should bring the crash rate back down.”

 

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Bill Smolick

    I hate that intersection on both a bike and a car when I’m heading northbound. I like the lane, but that intersection is garbage.

  • Bill Lee

    I prefer Howe going south and then over the Granville Bridge, easier to avoid Kitsilano hipsters. ;-). Hemlock, Bridge and Seymour going north, or go around tthe whole shebang, and do the Ontario/Main up and down. That is what the 6th avenue “bike route” of death was designed for.

    It is notorious and could they change the sight lines. or expand the sidewalks to make it fewer lanes meeting at the intersection. As it is, at the coummting times

  • Richard

    There is an outline painted that look like there will be a bit of curb installed to make it much more difficult to turn right onto westbound Pacific. I’d suggest emailing for more info. Also a good idea to report other cycling hazards.

  • gmgw

    Sorry… can’t stop laughing long enough to answer the question.
    gmgw

  • Glissando Remmy

    Thought Of The Night

    “What would Gregor do? Drive, bike, walk…?”

    Exactly! That biker should address that question directly to the Klutzky who started the whole circus.
    Before Vision Vancouver Clownship came to town, that intersection was manageable.
    It made sense.

    Not anymore.

    They wanted a separated bike lane on Burrard Bridge… now, the bumper to bumper pile of cars, idling their engines, spreads for 2-3 blocks, on Pacific Boulevard.
    If someone stops and watches that intersection for five minutes, they would be in for a surprise. Because in a matter of minutes, someone, either on foot, riding a bike, or driving a car… will violate one or several traffic laws.
    Because they can’t help themselves, people are risk takers, they follow the evolution laws, they find their own ways to better movement.

    We wouldn’t be talking about this subject now, if the whole scheme was not put together by a bunch of drunken sailors on their day off, instead of by planners & engineers with respect towards their profession. Nobody stood up to say:
    “This plan is idiotic!”
    Even these guys move faster…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_MnvHwjcIQ

    Don’t have to believe me, just do it, go there and watch for yourselves.

    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • Richard

    Seriously GR?

    This intersection has been a mess for decades. The 2001 Downtown Transportation Plan identified it as needing improvements for cyclists, peds and motorists. There used to always be car bit lying around as a result of all the collisions.

    Unfortunately, improvements were delayed by years of indecision regarding the bridge. Now with the bridge figured out, the city needs to get busy and fix the intersection.

  • Richard

    @GR

    Double right turn lanes made sense? Certainly not in this universe. Trucks or SUVs in the north lane would block the view of cars in the south lane leading to all kinds of problems.

  • IanS

    I understand the reason why the right turns are restricted, but the consequences of missing that right turn for drivers (ie. having to go over the bridge and then come back again) is such that they’re going to make the turn regardless. Doubly so since you can also no longer turn right onto Pacific from Thurlow (an odd bit of planning, to put it mildly).

    The solution (IMO) is to adjust the lights to allow for right turns, just like they do turning right from Hornby onto Georgia. That will allow for right turns under controlled circumstances and limit the danger caused by the bike lanes.

    Will it create additional congestion and pollution? Of course. It certainly does on Hornby / Georgia. But the bike lanes are already doing that and I doubt the additional pollution caused by the congestion will be any more than the additional pollution caused by the unintentional trips across the bridge and back.

  • Agustin

    What has the city done since your May 28th piece mentioned COV was planning on making it harder for cars to turn right there?

    There is some new green paint on the ground at the intersection, and that’s about the only difference I’ve seen lately.

    But I don’t think the paint is located at the place where the writer had a crash, if I’m reading things right.

  • Agustin

    @ Ian, I missed this before:

    Will it create additional congestion and pollution? Of course. It certainly does on Hornby / Georgia. But the bike lanes are already doing that

    I’m going to have to take a closer look next time I’m there. I could have sworn the pollution was coming out of the cars themselves….

  • IanS

    @Augustin #10:

    🙂

  • Frank Ducote

    While it would undoubtedly create more wait time for vehicles, a truly “normalized” intersection design at the north end (e.g., no on- and off-ramps) is ultimately the safest design for both pedestrians and cyclists. It could also would likely tempt more northbound drivers to stay on Burrard than to flow right onto Pacific and then Hornby. IMO this is desirable, since Burrard is a wider arterial than adjacent parallel streets are.

    Full normalization or regularization, however, is not likely to happen anytime soon, as the car lobby is still strong and there are some very real practical geometric issues with making it happen.

    The CoV owns the southeast corner of this intersection and a redevelopment there could trigger such a needed redesign of the intersection, one can only hope. Haven’t heard anything about this possibility in many years, however.

  • Richard

    Looks like the city might be considering improvements. It is on the map for priority improvements.
    http://talkvancouver.com/project/photos/5?photo_id=467.jpg

    One possibility is a bike ped overpass. As it is uphill on both sides of the intersection, this is a good spot for one. The approaches would be short, cyclists and peds would not have to wait for long lights and would not have to go downhill then up again. Cyclists often wait up hill until the light changes to save momentum. This would avoid the conflicts and be much safer.

  • Frank Ducote

    Richard@13 – now that’s a scary thought. Viaducts for bikes are okay it seems (at Dunsmuir, post removal of existing viaducts), now possibly at Burrard Bridge, too?

    Can’t see how an overpass aka viaduct would prevent peds and cyclists from using the bridge deck anyway. This is waaay too early for an April Fool’s joke! Maybe you have a link to a graphic that can explain the idea better than words can.

  • West End Gal

    Richard @ALL, GR is bang on, that intersection is a mess!
    What it needs is adequate traffic lights, signage, and before installing any more surprises… the city needs to educate all the helmet-less absent-minded bikers looking for trouble… however, not their fault… they are only following their leaders … the mayor Robertson and councilor Meggs in fact… 🙂

  • Michelle

    Glissy #5
    I know. it’s like trying to explain baby delivery to a roomful of men.
    Ha, 🙂

  • David

    Like Ian, I wonder what the reasoning is for banning right turns from Thurlow to Pacific. This is a recent change as streetview shows. It can’t be to reduce traffic on Pacific, as traffic now turns right on Beach (a playground zone) and turn left back onto Pacific at Jervis. http://goo.gl/maps/lqWZ

  • jenables

    David, i think the idea was that it was too dangerous for cyclists crossing Pacific southbound to the Bridger bike lane, HOWEVER in the slope down from Davie, almost any right turn will take you on a wild goose chase through an already very traffic calmed area. Add the people who don’t know the area, or used to know the area before, likely assuming there is another arterial before the bridge after Davie street, and you have a bit of a recipe for disaster. You’d have to drive more than two kilometers out of your way to get back on track. Maybe they should consider a protected right during the advance green for westbound pacific onto burrard, or a separate advance right for those turning right onto Pacific and also turning from Pacific onto the bridge. Did that make sense?

  • jenables

    Oops i totally read your question wrong David, i realize you were talking about thurlow now. Doh!