And now, closer to home, temporarily. So no bike-lane or TransLink uproars here in paradise. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t angst about transportation issues, as I discovered while here.
FRANCES BULA
HORNBY ISLAND — The Globe and Mail
Published
Last updated
As British Columbia prepares to build the longest cable ferry in the world, residents of the two Gulf Islands it will serve are hoping to shame the provincial government into halting the project.
“I’m going to try to publicly embarrass them,” said Peter Kimmerly, a former ferry and icebreaker captain who has led opposition to the new ferry plan for the route between Buckley Bay on Vancouver Island and Denman Island. The ferry would also be used by those crossing Denman to get to Hornby Island, home to about 1,000 permanent residents and up to 7,000 vacationers during the summer.
Mr. Kimmerly, a Hornby resident and operator of a gin distillery, has organized a public protest on Denman Island for next Sunday. He has started a petition that already has 600 signatures, and is encouraging everyone to write to B.C. Transportation Minister Todd Stone.
The BC Ferries board approved the plan last November for the 1.9-kilometre ferry, which will save the corporation 50 per cent of its current labour costs and up to 55 per cent of its fuel costs – or about $2-million a year.
Cable ferries are pulled from one venue to another by water currents and by winches at each end; this one will carry as many as 50 cars, the same as the old boat. BC Ferries rejected the idea of also building a cable ferry between Denman and Hornby islands, determining that the weather and water current conditions were too challenging. It says no other routes in B.C. would be suitable for a cable.
Residents turned out in force to public meetings on the two islands on Aug. 8, when they vociferously criticized the arguments presented by BC Ferries staff for a cable ferry. They say they’re being used for a dangerous experiment, that the existing ferry works fine, and that there will be inevitable problems with breakdowns and safety because of the design. Many people are also concerned that 15 of 30 ferry jobs will be eliminated. “It’s a crazy project,” Mr. Kimmerly said. “It’s such a lightweight little ship. And if this is built, it will be our ferry for 40 years.”
The anger speaks to the long-running anxiety island residents have about the ferry service that is essential to jobs off the island and livelihoods on it. Costs and fares have risen steadily in recent decades, sparking constant concern that the islands will become impossible to live or do business on.
“I can understand where the opposition is coming from. A lot of issues are driven by fear and apprehension because the ferries are the lifeline of our community,” said Tony Law, chairman of the BC Ferries advisory committee for the Denman and Hornby routes.
That committee hasn’t taken a position on the cable ferry because its members feel as though they don’t have the expertise to weigh in, Mr. Law said. Instead, the committee has focused on trying to get the ferries corporation to communicate as much as possible with residents.
Speaking only on his own behalf, Mr. Law said it’s hard for him to imagine that BC Ferries would put in place a system that would break down frequently.
But the committee’s reticence about assessing complex technical issues isn’t shared by opponents.
Mr. Kimmerly is quick to dispute the information about cable-ferry feasibility that BC Ferries has commissioned from engineering companies. He says he’d be willing to support a cable ferry if the design was changed to specify thicker cables and a vessel that is deeper and heavier.
“At the moment, it’s underdesigned,” Mr. Kimmerly said, adding the current design is for a vessel that is only 2.1 metres deep.
Mark Wilson, vice-president of engineering for BC Ferries, says the corporation has been doing feasibility studies and engineering analysis for the past three years. “Change doesn’t come easily. But we are committed to delivering the same level of safe, reliable and efficient service as past years.”
Posted extremely belatedly, but as the sharp-eyed observers likely know, I’ve been on another little jaunt, this time in B.C. (I expect Bill Lee knows my GPS co-ordinates and the history of the property where I’m staying.
Well, after five days and 134 speakers, by my count, city council approved the plan for the Seaside Greenway bike route, parks, pedestrian improvements through Point Grey and Kits. About 30 people came out to hear the final result. I thought they were all opponents, until a few people started hugging each other and congratulating advocates like Pam McColl.
I’m sure you have lots of opinions on the whole thing. Here’s my story, written as fast as I could type last night. More to come in the Globe in days to come.
It’s strange to see where the children are and aren’t these days. In my Mount Pleasant hood, you could be knocked down any minute by strollers. They’re everywhere. Other places numbers of children are up: Fairview, Riley Park, the West End, Kits, Renfrew-Collingwood. (I’m looking at numbers of 0-4 yrs in the last census, compared to age groups higher up.)
Where they’re down: Kerrisdale, which has 1,200 teens but only 530 little ones in that 0-4 range, Arbutus, Dunbar, Shaughnessy, Marpole, West Point Grey.
That means kids, or rather, their parents, are moving into the denser areas of the city. And now the school board is having to figure out how to build schools that aren’t the typical suburban one-storey numbers, but schools that can fit in next to condo towers.
The first effort will be down by International Village, across from the Rogers Arena. My story about it here.
In just the last few days, I have heard dozens of suggestions from amateur engineers about what would make a better greenway/bike route through Kitsilano. Here’s one, to get the ball rolling among those who agree, disagree, or have a better idea that is neither of the above.
I’m happy to put up other comments that are well-written, to the point, and insult-free, if anyone wants to send them in.
In the meantime, from reader David Johannson:
It appears that a critical detail in all of this — and what has been downplayed deliberately or because details may tend to have less public appeal — is what can still occur within the existing road width.
I am retired, but was professionally involved for years with real estate and city planning issues. I spent some time in the City Engineering Department yesterday to confirm what I had suspected.
Point Grey Road (along with the great majority of city roads) has a total dedicated width between private property boundaries of 66 feet (to convert this to metric multiply the imperial number by 0.3048 to equal 20.117 meters, which is usually rounded to 20.1 or 20.12 meters). However, the actual constructed road occupies less than one-half of this width. In fact, in the narrowest section between Alma and Waterloo Streets, the actual road — that is curb to curb — is some 27 feet wide. Within this constructed road there are two lanes of cars and one curb lane for parking. Adjacent to each of the north and south sides are curbs and sidewalks.
The remainder of the 66 foot road allowance — approximately 12 feet to the north and south of each sidewalk or 24 feet total– are vegetation buffers. Please note that these are not my figures, they were the ones estimated by Kanji, who works with Mike Anderson in the Transportation Department of Engineering. He did emphasize that the figures are subject to survey, but that the sizes quoted are what the existing city engineering drawings indicate.
The city representative confirmed that given the size of the road allowance and the extent of the existing usage, there is sufficient width left for the construction of additional pavement for bicycle uses. As an example of the ample room that is available, the existing road width of 27 feet allows for two lanes of cars and a partial width lane for parking. An additional 13 feet of constructed road, which surely would easily accommodate two bicycle lanes, would still provide for more than 6 feet of landscape on each side of the road.
The issue of size of the landscape buffer is thus what has driven the entire development proposal. Throughout the local area of Kitsilano, the private properties all appear to be larger than they really are, because the sidewalks have been constructed adjacent to or nearly adjacent to the road surfaces. The sidewalks’ locations have thus provided the properties with, effectively, additional (but publicly owned) land for their own uses. The property owners on Point Grey Road use this public buffer for their own benefits: to aid in the landscaped appeal of their properties, to informally use the space for parking purposes, and to provide them with privacy.
However, throughout our neighbourhood of Point Grey and in many other residential areas of the city, the sidewalks are constructed within 3 feet of the property line. The result here is that people using the sidewalk enjoy the public space between themselves and the road and are at the same time nearly adjacent to the private properties. Why should the Point Grey property owners enjoy a different street design than us?
It seems to me the same concept can be applied to Point Grey Road. The City should move and reconstruct the sidewalks on both sides of the road allowance so that they are within 3 feet of the property lines. In this way all of the land between the two sidewalks may be used for cars and bicycles, or, if is is desired, wider sidewalks. But above all, and especially because this particular road allowance is in demand by a variety of users, the city should use all of the public road allowance for public purposes.
One Twitter follower asked if I was writing for the Onion with this story in the Globe, so I guess the snark brigade will be out in full force here. Would be nice to have a more thoughtful discussion about developer contributions — do they deserve more acknowledgement or is their contribution in fact a pretty minimal tax on their profits, as I know some will think?
FRANCES BULA
Published Monday, Jul. 22, 2013 10:15PM EDT
Last updated Tuesday, Jul. 23, 2013 11:20AM EDT
Developers are growing increasingly exasperated that they get little or no credit for huge contributions they make to everything from culture to parks to daycares in the Lower Mainland – contributions increasingly required by area cities.
Speakers (starting at #18, with a list currently going to 204) resume tonight at 6 p.m. to discuss the pros and cons of the “Seaside Greenway,” known to many as the Point Grey/Kits bike lane.
A quick recap here of the doings at council on Tuesday.
Okay, now it’s the the Downtown Eastside’s turn at the “emerging directions” for their area plan — the last of the four neighbourhoods that are getting new visions for development and services.
The open house was yesterday, another one Saturday. Lots in there. (Here is the link to the city’s information boards.) A few of the highlights:
– rental-only district around Oppenheimer Park and down Hastings to what looks like Carrall. Sixty per cent of that to be low-cost.
– varieties of housing forms encouraged elsewhere in Gastown, Kiwassa, Chinatown, Strathcona, etc.
– buildings up to 150 feet in a few key spots, in exchange for social housing
– buildings 100 to 120 feet around Main and Hastings
– lots of talk about compatible infill development
– a promise to get two grocers into the hood, whatever incentives or breaks from the city it takes, along with other language about making sure the area stays inclusive
My story is here, but there is so much detail in the boards that it only skims the surface. There may be things I didn’t spot that are significant/interesting. Waiting to hear.
I didn’t have a chance to go to the open house. (Big project, still in a post-vacation funk, etc.) Rize/MP2014 doing an energetic job of tweeting out how they addressed all the city demands for changes.
The building certainly looks better. But, as I say, I didn’t see it up close. Your thoughts?
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.
