The City’s decision to re-appropriate public streets for the creation of a protected cycling track has been one of the most divisive civic issues in memory. News1130 and other media have labeled it a misappropriation of public space and funds, business owners along the routes are furious, and motorists grow increasingly frustrated. With City Council’s October 5 decision to approve the Hornby bike trial, the debate seems destined to intensify.
In the recent SFU-sponsored talk A Field Guide to Public Transit Debates, transportation consultant Jarrett Walker attributed the ferocity of these disputes to our inherent inclination to underestimate the rationale of others’ decisions. This he explained by way of the fundamental attribution error, which describes the human inclination to judge others’ behaviour through our own biased lenses.
In a recent interview with The Tyee, Dave Pratt, co-host of The Team 1040’s Pratt and Taylor show, upheld that “dedicated bike lanes are not wanted and [...] are not needed.” Pratt, whose show purports to be “the sports fanatics’ #1 choice on the drive home,” maintains an understandable perspective. The majority of radio listeners tune in from their cars, and call-in shows have served as a major battleground in the bike lane debate, with rush-hour motorists venting over the re-appropriation of road space while automobile congestion remains.
According to Vancouver City Councillor Geoff Meggs, congestion is a key factor in the decision to expand the cycling network. With a growing population but limited space, he says that the City is forced to look for other transportation options. “For ten years, at least, Council has had a goal of increasing cycling because there’s no room to add extra roads downtown. We want to continue to grow the economy and the population of the downtown core,” Meggs explains, “it’s a very cost-effective way to do transportation because the impact on roads from cyclists is almost nil.”
With 35 individuals stepping up to speak at the Council’s Tuesday vote, the question as to whether this goal would be pursued by way of a Hornby bike track was fiercely debated late into the night. Despite strong opposition from local business owners and the Canadian Federation of Independent businesses, Council voted unanimously to approve the trial and circulated a letter to affected businesses Wednesday indicating that construction would begin immediately.
By 7:30 the next morning, work crews were already breaking ground on Hornby, prompting NPA Counciller Suzanne Anton to rescind her support for the project. “No one who spoke to Council on Tuesday expected to be a part of a Kangaroo council,” she says in an October 6 news release. “It is a fundamental trust between citizens and their elected representatives that when we meet in council chambers that we are there to listen, deliberate and debate, and finally decide based upon the inputs we have received.”
“It is crystal clear to me now that Tuesday’s council meeting was a mere formality, and pure political theatre.”
For Hi-Fi Centre owner Igor Kivritsky, a 25-year veteran of Seymour Street, it’s just more bad news for downtown business. Kivritsky, whose high-end stereo store is steps from the Dunsmuir cycle track, claimed at that track’s unveiling that he stood to lose $1 million a year in sales as a result of the elimination of right-hand turns from Dunsmuir onto Seymour. Three months later, Kivritsky estimates that his sales are down 20% from last year; he faults the new difficulty in accessing his store. “Traffic has plummeted and sales have followed. It has hurt our business,” he says.
Gordon Price, Director of SFU’s City Program and former NPA City Councillor, rejects the idea that the new bike lanes have a negative effect on businesses. “What I object to is the assumption that removing parking and putting in a cycle track is bad for business,” he says, “I’ve got studies which indicate it isn’t, what do you have?”
Kivritsky’s criticisms don’t end at the business impact. He claims that the segregated lanes encourage people to adopt a dangerous mode of transportation; increase air pollution by increasing traffic congestion; and put too big a dent in our city’s funds to benefit too few users.
“I’m not against cyclists,” Kivritsky says. “There should be some provision for people who want to cycle for it to be safe, but I think the city is putting too much — they’re giving too much infrastructure to too small of a group of people.”
According to Gordon Price, the issue is just as much about local transportation as it is about the broader social and environmental challenges: “If you don’t like cycling, let’s talk peak oil. If you don’t like peak oil, let’s talk climate change. If you don’t like climate change, let’s talk obesity.”
All of this conflicting emotion and information puts the Downtown Business Improvement Association in a tricky spot. With pressure building on both sides, Charles Gauthier, Executive Director, explains, “We’re not opposed to cycling, we’re just concerned about what separated bike lanes do;” admitting, “Maybe in 3-5 years, if someone said to me there’s been a huge growth in cycling and that’s been a benefit to businesses that would start to change some opinions around the table.”
Jarrett Walker remains elusive with his opinion, opting instead to offer a few words of advice: A useful question to ask, he suggests, is “What if this person’s seemingly odd behavior is actually a rational response to a situation that I don’t fully understand?”
While we may all be reacting sensibly according to our own interests, this begs the question as to why the bigger issues — the ones affecting everyone — aren’t changing some opinions around the table.
Despite this I feel there is a lot of alcohol... - Natalie
I’m glad we have a council that is attempting to find long-term solutions to transportation.
Loved. Agree or disagree:
18 
3
Slightly off topic, but the goal of increasing the population of the downtown core is not really an issue that has been debated. The benefits are a reduction of sprawl, more efficient use of energy, and, perhaps, the development of a “community identity” (whatever the fuck that means). Also, developers seem to be making a mint selling downtown condos to the yuppie masses. The downsides are slightly more elusive. Will the rapid increase of residential space at the expense of commercial space turn downtown into nothing more than a resort community? Will the move of commercial and industrial space to the suburbs merely reverse the direction of long commutes, as opposed to eliminating them? Will a sudden (inevitable?) downturn in the real estate market turn downtown highrise condo buildings (full of shoebox apartments) into giant ghettos (see the Ponte City Apartment tower in Johannesburg). Multi-use buildings seems to be the current exception, rather than the norm. I don’t imagine there are any safe answers to these questions. In fact, hang those who tell you there are. Nevertheless, should the questions not be considered?
Agree or Disagree:
7 
2
Gordon Price has always been a smug asshole who isn’t interested in the opinions of those who oppose his. When you live at the centre of the universe (i.e. downtown Vancouver) and your entire life is within walking distance, this all sounds great and makes *your* life better. For everyone else, reality sometimes dictates that a vehicle is necessary.
Ever try to get 3 kids to hockey (with huge gear bags, one hour after school, across town? The bus is not an option.
Hot.
5 
19
How do bike lanes in the west end stop you from getting your kids to hockey practice?
Loved. Agree or disagree:
21 
2
You could get a cargo bike and or a bike trailer and then you could still get to hockey practice in no time with kids and all.
Agree or Disagree:
8 
7
Fuck all you lycra wearing pieces of shit that block 2 lanes of traffic so you can ride 5 abreast going to the cafe to get yourselves a cup of coffee and talk about how great the “Insert faggot ass bike race in some faggot ass Eurpoean city” was and how you can wait to get your kids involved. You honestly have no idea how badly I am willing to go to jail to end that.
Hot.
10 
27
I think Johnny has perfectly exemplified the underlying cause of such inefficient social collaboration. Without a mind to at least consider another viewpoint, how can a person present a comprehensive and compelling argument either for or against an issue? It is easier to make sure your opponent listens to you and considers your opinion by working with them and guiding them through the weakness in their argument, rather than creating hostility by using an accusatory and emotionally-driven tone.
Only with logical, well-formulated arguments can we expect to come to an intelligent solution on any issue. Without this, a person is only speaking to those who share the same opinion; those of opposing viewpoints, offended by the other’s lack of consideration, will merely turn away and stop listening. Comments like Johnny’s are what keep important issues, like those discussed above, stagnant. Emotions and personal experience ought to be taken into account, but debates rely on facts, logic and organized thought.
Loved. Agree or disagree:
29 
6
With respect to Michael’s point, I don’t think it was that bike lanes in the West End kep him from getting his kids to hockey practice. I think his point was that Gordon Price promotes development policy without considering lifestyles other than his own, urban lifestyle. I’m not agreeing with Michael or Price, but I think it’s only fair to address his real point.
Agree or Disagree:
9 
0
I think Sara rides a bike, and attends a women’s study class at Langara College.
Hot.
10 
10
Sara- WOW! You sure can string words together! Your eloquent & erudite response to Johhny’s crass comments is probably not going to change his attitude overnight, but he apparently reads The Dependent, so there’s hope…? Thankyou for allowing frustration to overcome apathy in the face of stupidity. I look forward to your next rant.
Agree or Disagree:
11 
3
What I find most intriguing about the debate over a separated bike lane is that it is so fierce and emotional. I suspect that for those who oppose it, the decision about building the bike lane is symbolic for them and suggests that the future is going to be a different place that does not always cater to their choice to drive long distances to work, home and play. I see that billions is being spent on the Port Mann bridge, Highway One widening and Perimeter Road. So I do not grasp the argument that building this bike lane means that car drivers are not getting their fair share of infrastructure dollars.
The bike lane makes sense to me for a few reasons:
(1) it will improve the safety of cycling and that’s a good thing;
(2) the mode split of transportation in and to the downtown has in the past 20 years shifted away from the car and this has happened as the number of jobs have increased in the peninsula and the number of people living there has increased by about 60,000 residents and is on the way to increase again by 30,000 more.
(3)the residential area of the downtown and west end have the highest density of children in the city of vancouver. Therefore, safer spaces for these children to walk, skateboard and ride their bikes is a good thing.
(4) what seems to get lost in the concern for the downtown retailers is that customer surveys for downtown retailers that I have reviewed show that about a 1/4 of customers drive and the remaining live or work downtown so the retailers will actually see their customers increase in the future because jobs and residents are projected to increase significantly in the downtown.
(5) lastly, on a personal note, I do own a car and I do purchase my stereo equipment at Egor’s business and I can easily find parking on Richards Street which is a shorter walk from the store than I would find in the big suburban malls where you have to walk through expanses of parking lots or parkades. Also, when I am not picking up stereo equipment and other things you cannot carry long distances, I mostly walk, ride a bike and skateboard and I am still holding off the onset of obesity.
(6) LOL, one more thing, cycling is so much more fun than driving and so much cheaper. It’s great to have choices and not be ruled by the car which in one’s life can consume hours of one’s time working to pay for it or sitting and being frustrated by congestion which primarily is caused by all the other folks driving, not by people riding their bicycles.
Have a great day everyone. I’ve already had a nice walk and later after doing chores I want to go for a ride on my bike or my skateboard. Another day not driving is another day of spending less money on my choice of transportation and having more fun.
Loved. Agree or disagree:
20 
1
Sara and Mike both make a number of excellent points, glad to see the big picture is in focus for at least a few Vancouverites. We are fortunate enough to be nipping this issue in the bid, many major North American cities have such bad air pollution and congestion that people are completely relegated to indoor spaces, or refuse to ride their bikes due to the negative impact on their health. Have we not seen the smog warnings for Toronto in past summers?Or the blanket of haze over LA?
European, and some N. American cities, ie Portland, are vibrant because of cycling and pedestrian culture, if you really want to drive your car, go join the rest of suburbia in a mall, disconnected from the reality of truly progressive urban design. Breed and die in the shallow end of your gene pool.
And Johnny… your a bigoted homophobic ignorant racist. I hope your try and run me over, you will find yourself in the hospital so fast it will make your head spin, or at least the impact from my U lock will.
Loved. Agree or disagree:
11 
1