Victoria's Traffic Narrow-mindedness Threatens Innovation
A truly multimodal approach to transportation takes a back seat to cycling infrastructure
As long as our local political establishment remains focused solely on expanding cycling infrastructure throughout the region, all other forms of transportation from personal vehicles to transit and pedestrians will suffer from a lack of innovation and development during an exceptional period of growth. Many political leaders in our region talk a big game when it comes to multimodal transportation— a urban planning concept that seeks to maximize the use of many forms of transportation to get people moving throughout a city or region— but the reality is that when placed alongside the priority given to cycling infrastructure, we are a long way off from having anything legitimately resembling a multimodal transportation network.
The very popular sketch comedy show Portlandia once featured a bit where two young hipsters would make items in their life fashionable by painting a small bird on them. The sketch would feature the item, first bland without a bird on it and then a voice over would say “put a bird on it” and the item would reappear with a bird and be shown in a new, more fashionable, light. It is a funny joke and the phrase “put a bird on it” becomes a catchy way of articulating the occasional shallowness of new trends. I bring this sketch up because just like the voice over in the show declaring seriously “put a bird on it” as a solution to the woes of blandness, so it seems that our City Council has adopted the phrase “put a bike lane on it” to solve any and all of their transportation woes. The only problem with this approach is that, given the limited resources available to any local government in Canada, the sole focus on cycling infrastructure expansion has hindered development and innovation in other areas of regional and local transportation that require attention.
We are just getting this newsletter off of the ground and need as much support as we can get. Please consider subscribing to the newsletter to show your support and get regular updates as they are posted directly to your email inbox.
If you are already a subscriber, please consider sharing this publication with a relative or friend you think might be interested (and thank you!). Twitter and Facebook are always great venues to share our newsletters and add your own comment and perspective.
Take transit as one example. And I know that a favourite past time for any local Victorian is to hate on transit. I do not doubt that the majority of those reading this newsletter have experienced a late bus (or a complete no-show) at some point. Say nothing of the struggle to wrap your own head around the Victoria Regional Transit System’s broad area coverage network. But transit is an exceptionally important element of multimodal transportation and not just for low-income residents but also seniors, students, people with disabilities and regional commuters. There are a great many people who depend on our local transit services each and every day to get to work and school or to run errands or enjoy an outing with friends. But the expansion of cycling infrastructure in our city has only served to hinder transit both directly and indirectly.
Single-minded cycling infrastructure development has directly hindered transit planning and effectiveness throughout the region by mixing the two modes of travel within a single (and often narrow) corridor along arterial roadways. An excellent example of this is the permitting of cycling within the bus lanes that run along Douglas street. It doesn’t take looking at a regional transit map for very long to see how vital Douglas street is to the transit system. Almost every bus heading in and out of the downtown core uses the route. Where the highway is under the jurisdiction of the province and then Saanich, cyclists are not permitted within the bus lane and are instructed to cycle on the far right of the public travel lane. However, south of Tolmie street, cyclists are permitted through the authority of the City of Victoria to share the lane with buses. The majority of this roadway is 50km/hr and local traffic often moves at our near those speeds even with congestion. However, the average cyclist only moves between 15-20km/hr and that is if they are intent on getting to a certain destination (many cyclists use the lane for leisure and rightfully move at a slower pace). This means that the bus is limited to the speed of a cyclist throughout the length of the bus lane or until the cyclist decides to move out of the way. And while it is possible for the bus to change lanes into the public travel lane, this defeats the whole purpose of the bus lane and if designed properly should not even be permitted with a solid white line to separate the public and bus travel lanes.
The nut to crack (that planners have created for themselves) is how to develop a system where the bus and bicycle can share space and be safe. The obvious answer (and the reason I say it is created for themselves) is to not develop cycling infrastructure along the same corridors that transit depends on. But our political establishment has insisted on the bike lanes being present along all major corridors, without regard to use by other transportation elements, in order to increase ridership. This of course comes at the expense of transit ridership as more and more passengers seek alternative forms after being frustrated at the ineffectiveness of transit itself.
Another great example of how single-minded cycling infrastructure has directly hindered transit is the now-infamous floating bus stops that were developed as a means of blending cycling and transit into one narrow corridor. Since having a dedicated bike lane on the right side of roadways presents an obvious problem for a city bus that boards on the right side, city planners have developed a means to board the bus from stops that require crossing the bike lanes. These have presented a significant problem for two very represented segments of society in transit; seniors and people with disabilities. These people find it difficult to assess a safe moment to cross the lane, especially with cyclists moving at 15-20km/hr (and now with ebikes that can move even faster and weigh much more than a standard bicycle). People with visual or auditory disabilities are unable to make a safe assessment to cross. And these concerns have been brought into a formal process that involves the city in order to seek a resolution. But the problem started because of narrow-minded transportation planning that focused solely in cycling infrastructure to the exclusion of everything else.
And it is not just directly that the bike lanes and cycling infrastructure have hindered transit. I mentioned earlier that most of us probably have a story of a very late or no-show bus. It is important to remember that no bus starts their route late, they almost always begin on time. But they certainly do not end on time and there are a variety of reasons for this. Local traffic is a huge one but it is often given too much emphasis by people when complaining about the bus. Traffic patterns are fairly consistent and transit regularly tracks and updates how their buses move on each route in any period of the day. The slow traffic is often already factored very accurately into the fixed-route schedule. But a major factor in slowing the bus down is time at each stop and this can be very difficult for transit planners to factor into the schedule.
I am sure we’ve all been on the bus before when the deck has to be lowered for a person using a mobility aid or the whole ramp has to be deployed for a wheelchair. This time at the stop adds up very quickly and all it really takes is a handful of passengers requiring extra assistance to board the bus and delight down the route for the bus to be 5-10 minutes behind on their schedule. But there is a better way, and we’ve already studied and understand it. Raised platforms, like the ones you see employed on the SkyTrain in Vancouver, almost eliminate the need for the bus floor to be lowered and the ramp deployed. This greatly reduced unscheduled periods at a stop when the bus should be moving through their route. Raised platforms are also safer for people from all walks of life— not just those with disabilities or requiring mobility assistance. We do not have a single raised platform bus stop in all of Victoria proper. While the face of our downtown has changed dramatically with the construction of condos and bike lanes, our bus stops have remained virtually untouched and the same. This is just one clear example of how a sole focus on cycling infrastructure stifles transit development and modernization in our region.
With the expansion of the AAA cycling network along Fort street to connect to Oak Bay, we had another moment to develop a truly multimodal transportation system. Fort street is another vital transit corridor that gets heavy use by students and seniors with a link to UVic/Camosun (via Richardson and Foul Bay) and the obvious link between the downtown core and Oak Bay. It is also used by cyclists and does need proper cycling infrastructure. The roadway surface itself is also in terrible disrepair and requires a complete end-to-end overhaul (not just patching up, which makes things worse for the potholes and bumps in the long run). All of these points touch on an aspect of multimodal transportation and yet only one is receiving significant attention; the bike lanes. There is much work that could be done along Fort street. We could have a bike lane that integrates properly with the travel lane complete with proper pull-out stops for buses so that cyclists and personal vehicles can continue while the bus is stopped. We could have raised bus stops to limit the time a bus has to be at a stop to encourage the schedule to run on time and make transit more reliable so that more people use it regularly. This would have the added bonus of being safer for all users. But instead we are just focusing on bike lanes.
It is great and wonderful to live in a city that has transportation on the top of their priority list. It is great and wonderful that we are trying to seek alternatives to personal vehicle use. But these things do not have to come with a single-mind track focus on cycling to the exclusion of all other forms of transportation. A phrase about a pendulum comes to mind when I read cycling advocates call out traffic infrastructure development because we’ve focused on cars so much for so long— there’s no need to correct an error with another error. And I feel we just might be doing that when we focus on cycling over all others forms of transportation, especially transit.
This is a very thoughtful piece and one could only wish the "experts" at city hall would pay attention. But they won't. Victoria is cursed with what I call "Silo Planning" in all departments. No department makes an upgrade or improvement giving any thought whatsoever to how that might affect other departments. And the thought of seeking advice from front line people in any jurisdiction is entirely out of the question because, surely, no one can possibly know as much as the experts at City Hall. A notion which is clearly demonstrated to be untrue just about every day of the week.
A lot of those things, like a deluxe Douglas St. rapid transit lane, have been on BC Transit's wish list for years. The present lane-splitting bike path is awkward, yes, but a cyclist choosing the wisely hug the curb instead shouldn't impede buses who can pass like they do on any other street.