Point Grey Road – Analysis – No need to create winners and losers!

(Intro: A key component of the City staff’s just-released final proposal for the Point Grey Road – Cornwall Avenue Corridor is the City’s decision to recommend an option that would close a section of Point Grey Road from Alma to MacDonald Street to through traffic, with limited access via Alma and local streets. As we have often witnessed in recent years, the City is creating winners and losers, with the former typically being political campaign donors, the connected, and the strongest lobby groups. Below is an article contributed to CityHallWatch by a concerned citizen who believes the City is avoiding an everyone-wins option. See also our post on City Council meetings on July 23 and 24 when this topic will be decided. And now for the story…)

At a media briefing on July 17, 2013, the City released final staff recommendations for the Point Grey Road – Cornwall Avenue Corridor Active Transportation Project:
http://former.vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20130723/documents/rr3.pdf

Final recommendations are little changed from those presented at a series of open houses in May. See previous post:
https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/point-grey-road-cornwall-avenue-open-houses-may-25-28-and-everyone-wins-option/

Fig. 1

Section 1 – improved sidewalks and separated bike lanes on the north side of Point Grey Road.
Section 2a – converting Point Grey Road west of Macdonald into a local street.
Section 3 – improved sidewalks and separated bike lanes on the north side of Point Grey Road.
Section 4 – walking and cycling connection on Stephens to Point Grey Road and alternating one-way streets on York between Vine and Maple.

The only news, and a growing source of controversy, is the City’s decision to recommend Option 2a for Point Grey Road, between Alma and MacDonald streets that will close Point Grey Road to through traffic with limited access via Alma and local streets. 

Residents of Point Grey Road are understandably very pleased with the outcome as they are soon to become residents of a traffic-calmed local street rather than a busy arterial road.  Cycling advocacy groups, including HUB (formerly the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition) a non-profit that works closely with the City and received government (including the City of Vancouver) funding of more that $275,000 in 2012, are also enthusiastic supporters.

Together, PGR Residents and HUB petitions backing the City’s plan have attracted more than 3000 signatures: PGR Residents Petition and HUB Petition.

But are these groups, with evident special interests in the project outcome, representative of Vancouverites at large and what about the local community beyond Point Grey Road?

There is justifiably a good deal of concern and growing opposition on MacDonald Street, where recommended closure of Point Grey Road would roughly double the current traffic volume (an estimated 10,000 additional vehicles per day) on top of two high-frequency diesel bus services that will continue to operate on Cornwall.  West 4th Ave and Broadway, where traffic impacts (including bus and truck traffic) and collision frequencies are much higher than on Point Grey Road, would also see increased traffic volumes.

Fig. 2

Fig. 3 Source http://talkvancouver.com/document/show/209

Residents of local streets north of 4thand west of MacDonald (as well as east of MacDonald) are similarly concerned that closure of Point Grey Road will increase traffic within the neighbourhood as motorists attempt to avoid congestion at MacDonald and 4th and to access the beach, parks and residences on Point Grey Road.

At a packed local townhall meeting in late June, local residents were largely opposed to the City’s options for Point Grey Road and called on the City to “slow down”, to extend the public consultation process and to consider alternative options.  Concerns were also expressed about the lack of clarity around the cost of proposed improvements.

An on-line consultation process initiated by local residents through PlaceSpeak, a location-based platform for community engagement, offers an interesting perspective on the balance of local opinion (Note: participants are indicated by green dots).

Fig 4. Source: https://www.placespeak.com/topic/777-cornwall-avenue-point-grey-road-road-closure/

While “Discussions” provide a glimpse of the growing division between proponents of the PGR closure and those opposed, the poll suggests that a clear majority of local residents taking part in the consultation are looking for an alternative that retains Point Grey Road as an arterial street.

For example, the Everyone Wins alternative (see previous CityHallWatch post here https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/point-grey-road-cornwall-avenue-open-houses-may-25-28-and-everyone-wins-option/)

Fig 5. (Download in PDF –  PGR fig 5 everyone wins high-res). Source: http://everyonewinsvancouver.blogspot.ca/2013/02/point-grey-cornwall-corridor.html

This proposes a local street bikeway on West 1st Avenue.  Notably, in response to strong public interest in this idea, the City claims to have looked at W 1st and subsequently included it on a list of “routes that have been set aside” (i.e. rejected) as part of the Phase 2 consultation process.   But, there’s no indication that it was taken seriously. See http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/Point-Grey-Cornwall-Public-Consultation-Phase2-Intro-Boards-Routes-Not-Recommended.pdf.

Rather, what’s become clear to many, is that closure of Point Grey Road was a predetermined outcome that is more about politics than it is about transportation.

But, of course, that hasn’t stopped the City from going through the motions of public consultation and, frankly, while one could argue that notification was less than effective, it would be wrong to claim that staff failed to reach out.

The question, as raised by CityHallWatch in connection with any number of issues, is whether public consultation was meaningful or simply window dressing for a foregone conclusion?  Is the format and content of public consultation designed to yield a desired response?  Is public input and feedback considered in an open and objective fashion or selectively filtered to yield the appearance of support for a predetermined outcome?

In the report released Wednesday, the City Manager claims that “there is good support for the overall transportation goals inherent in this project and specific and extensive input from the public assisted staff in taking a balanced approach in addressing the sometimes competing issues of local residents, cyclists, pedestrians, transit and drivers”.  Does this seem like a cautious effort to make the most of less than convincing public support for the City’s recommendations?

Notably, the Phase 2 on-line survey (see below) made it rather difficult not to support the overall goals of the project.  Obviously Vancouverite’s are polite and progressive people.  Who wouldn’t support the project goals in a general way if they could rely on the City not to take liberties with that well-intentioned support?  But remarkably, according to the report, a full 39% of respondents did not. 

Fig 6

Fig. 7

The report describes the level of project support as follows:

“ Project Support

Of the 1730 respondents who completed the questionnaire, 61% supported the goals* of the project and 39% did not.

 When respondents were asked about their level of support for the design proposals, 41% stated they did not support the design proposals, 34% supported it completely and 24% supported it with refinements. Some of those refinements included:

•  o Significant concerns regarding network impacts, suggestions included additional analysis/monitoring and traffic calming to prevent speeding/shortcutting
• o Would prefer the bike route on Cornwall o Need to address transit efficiency
• o Need to better accommodate commuter vehicle traffic
• o Mitigate parking impacts
• o Mitigate local access issues
• o Revisit proposed Chestnut closure

 Of those who supported the goals of the project, 90% of respondents supported the design proposals completely or with refinements and 10% of respondents who supported the goals of the project, did not support the design proposals.

 Of those who did not support the goals of the project, 88% of respondents do not support the design proposals.”

Clearly, a respondent opposed to the proposed closure of Point Grey Road could conceivably support both the goals of the project as well as the design proposals with refinements.  Is this what “Significant concerns regarding network impacts” refer to?  Are these significant concerns about disruptions to the arterial road network related to Options 2a and/or 2b?

Notably, the following assessment of public response to City’s recommended Option 2a also appears to make the most of public opinion gathered through the City’s on-line survey:

“(2a) Alma Street to Macdonald Street – Local Street Option (Point Grey Road)

 Staff heard from the neighbourhood at the public open houses as well as from stakeholder meetings and through the online questionnaire that this option for this section of Point Grey Road better addressed pedestrian safety by calming traffic and was safer and more comfortable for cyclists. Concerns were also raised about vehicles rerouting onto Macdonald and 4th Avenue west of Macdonald and impacting Kitsilano residents.

Questionnaire Response

• o Over 50% of respondents felt that the design improved pedestrian (52%) and cyclist (59%) safety, comfort and convenience and 57% said that the reduced vehicle volumes and speeds were a benefit/best feature.
• o The majority of respondents (69%) felt that vehicles rerouting onto nearby arterial streets (e.g. 4th Avenue, Broadway, Macdonald, etc.) was a concern/impact along with reduced vehicle access (42%) and reduced vehicle capacity (39%)”

Not surprisingly, the vast majority (69%) of respondents “felt that vehicles rerouting onto nearby arterial streets (e.g. 4th Avenue, Broadway, Macdonald, etc.) was a concern/impact”.  Why is the City not concerned about these impacts on residents of nearby arterial streets?

Given the foregoing picture of public feedback, one can appreciate the apparent caution with which the City Manager describes the nature of public support.  The report also notes that more than 1000 responses were received at the project e-mail address pointgrey-cornwall@vancouver.ca, but there is no reporting of the nature of feedback received.  Is it possible that people electing to provide feedback via e-mail, rather than the on-line questionnaire expressed a different range of opinions?  Why is this feedback not summarized or otherwise reported?

And what about the Everyone Wins alternative?  The blog has reportedly received nearly 4,000 hits and it’s surprising that this level of interest failed to register a reportable response.  Notably, the only sign of it in the City’s report is on a list of “Community Surveys and Petitions”.  Interesting.. seems more like a constructive alternative put forward in response to the City’s public engagement process, and one that appears to accommodate the full range of transportation modes on the corridor in a balanced and practical fashion.

Citizens should be asking whether public consultation on the Point Grey Road – Cornwall Avenue Active Transportation Project was really open and responsive to public input and feedback.  Staff were apparently listening, but were they hearing?  And, if so, what about the City’s reporting of what they heard?  Is it objective and representative, or is it selective and biased to yield the appearance of support for a predetermined and predictably unpopular outcome?

Fig. 8

CityHallWatch has reported previously on the the Mayor’s Engaged City Task Force (https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2013/05/22/mayor-announces-results-of-engaged-city-task-force/), a City-appointed body commissioned to improve the ways the City engages and communicates with citizens.  Sounds good, but questions have already been raised about whether the City is really interested in improving public engagement or simply looking for strategies to refocus engagement on segments of the population more likely to support its agenda.

In the present case, a growing perception is that the City is exploiting the support of special interest groups to advance an initiative to increase the number of people walking and cycling.  The City will point to its Greenest City Action Plan and Transportation 2040, as policy imperatives for reaching a goal of seeing at least half of all trips in Vancouver made by walking, cycling or public transit by 2020.  That’s great, but Vancouverites surely want a say in the way in which that target is pursued.

The reality is that the majority of Vancouverites are supportive of the City’s aim to promote active transportation, but the majority also wants to see the City to advance that aim through meaningful public consultation and consensus building, rather than imposing as it sees fit.  Progress should be made in a way that is gradual and encouraging rather than radical and divisive.

So, how should the City move forward on the Point Grey Road – Cornwall Avenue Corridor Active Transportation Project?  Surely not by ramming through an unpopular decision were some are winners and others are losers.. especially with obvious practical alternatives where everyone wins!

Elsewhere in the City (including Burrard Bridge), bike lanes and related infrastructure have been introduced on a trial basis, or phased-in, with related assessment and monitoring of resulting influence on traffic patterns and potential neighbourhood impacts.  Given the scale, complexity and collateral implications of the Point Grey – Cornwall project, there is every good reason for taking just such an approach.

In particular, if we accept that “reducing.. (rather than eliminating).. the volume and speed of traffic on Point Grey Road” is an objective of the project, it would seem perfectly reasonable to presume that planned reconfiguration of the Burrard-Cornwall intersection, together with introduction of separated bike lanes between Trafalgar and MacDonald, will go a long way toward realizing the desired outcome.  Given uniquely significant implications and related opposition, why not hold off on closure of Point Grey Road, pending subsequent monitoring, assessment and further evaluation of alternatives west of MacDonald?

Given current combined funding requests of up to $12 million, including $6.0 million for “Burrard Street Bridge South End Improvements” (http://former.vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20130724/documents/ptec6.pdf), a “wait and see” approach could also save the city’s taxpayers a good deal of money.

City Council is scheduled to consider staff recommendations next Tuesday, July 23 at 9:30 AM and with public comment scheduled to begin at 2:00 PM.

See meeting agenda here http://former.vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20130723/regu20130723ag.htm

What can you do to encourage responsible action on this issue?

1. Sign the petition that calls on the City of Vancouver “to develop a third option for the Cornwall/Point Grey Road corridor that keeps Point Grey Road open in both directions and minimizes negative impacts on neighbourhoods along the entire corridor and on the broader community”.

http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/mayor-and-council-vancouver-bc-develop-a-third-option-for-the-cornwall-point-grey-road-corridor

1. Send an e-mail to mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca, expressing your views.

or

3.   Speak directly to City Council .. register to address council on the Point Grey Road – Cornwall Avenue Corridor Active Transportation Project by e-mail: mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca, phone: 311 or facsimile: 604-873-7419

NOTE:

Significantly, or not, Mayor Robertson has elected not to vote on the issue to avoid any perception that his recent purchase of a home in close proximity of the proposed York Avenue bikeway could be viewed as a conflict of interest.  But, of course, given Vision’s record of block voting there’s little chance that the Mayor’s vote would swing the outcome one way or the other.

If it’s any indication, though, the Mayor’s mind has apparently been made up on the Point Grey Road closure for some time.  In response to a petition calling on the City of Vancouver to “Re-evaluate Point Grey-Cornwall Project Plan”, the Mayor reportedly responded “I love 2A and the localizing of PGR it makes complete and utter sense to make a neighborhood safer” (see here).  It would be interesting to know how the Mayor feels about the resulting implications for safety on MacDonald.