Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTAC 2018-09-26 Agenda City of Maple Ridge ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA September 26, 7:00 pm Blaney Room, Maple Ridge City Hall 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES –July 25, 2018 4. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4.1. Speed limit consideration on Dewdney Trunk Road from 222 Street to 227 Street Links to the staff report and video from the January 9, 2018 Council Workshop meeting. Item 5.3 Active Transportation Advisory Committee: Bicycling on Sidewalks and Speed Limits in the Town Centre Report – Item 5.3: http://mapleridge.ca/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_01092018-2989 Council Workshop Video – Item 5.3 (minute 1:57:00) http://media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Play/ec303b3d9810443ab0a31e8bec3108251d 4.2. Active Transportation Technologies and Programs 4.3. 240 Street Bike Lane Extension 4.4. 2019 Business Planning 5. CORRESPONDENCE 5.1. Polygon/Morningstar Development 2015-297-RZ Letter dated August 13, 2018 from Barry Bellamy, Co-Chair HUB Cycling, retracting HUB support for the Polygon/Morningstar development at 232 Street and Lougheed Hwy. Letter dated September 10, 2018 from Jackie Chow, HUB Cycling, regarding the active transportation connection. 6. QUESTION PERIOD 7. ROUNDTABLE 8. ADJOURNMENT QUESTION PERIOD Question Period provides the public with the opportunity to ask questions or make comments on subjects that are of concern to them. Each person will be given 2 minutes to speak. Up to ten minutes in total is allotted for Question Period. /aa City of Maple Ridge ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Active Transportation Advisory Committee, held in the Blaney Room, at Maple Ridge City Hall on July 25, 2018 at 6:59 pm. ____________________________________________________________________________________ COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT Councillor Duncan Council Liaison Kino Roy, Chair Member at Large, Youth Representative Dave Rush Cycling Representative Ineke Boekhorst Downtown Maple Ridge Business Improvement Association Kim McLennan Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility and Inclusiveness Representative Cpl. Steven Martin Ridge Meadows RCMP – Traffic Services Susan Carr School District No. 42 Wayne Stevens, Vice Chair Seniors Community Representative STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT David Pollock Municipal Engineer / Staff Liaison Purvez Irani Manager of Transportation Amanda Allen Committee Clerk ABSENT Paul Yeoman Member at Large Franklin Salguero Member at Large Note: Paul Yeoman was not in attendance. Kino Roy chaired the meeting as Vice Chair. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA R/2018-003 It was moved and seconded That the agenda for the July 25, 2018 Active Transportation Advisory Committee be amended to add Item 4.6 DropBike Program and that the agenda as amended be approved. CARRIED 3. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES R/2018-004 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Maple Ridge Active Transportation Advisory Committee meeting dated March 28, 2018 be adopted. CARRIED Active Transportation Advisory Committee Minutes July 25, 2018 Page 2 of 4 4. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4.1. 2018 Chair and Vice Chair Elections Note: Ineke Boekhorst joined the meeting at 7:09 pm. The Staff Liaison opened the floor to nominations for a Chair. By acclamation, Kino Roy was selected Chair of Active Transportation Advisory Committee for 2018. By acclamation, Wayne Stevens was selected Vice Chair of the Active Transportation Advisory Committee for 2018. Note: Councillor Duncan joined the meeting at 7:13 pm. Note: Kino Roy resumed as Chair at the meeting. 4.2. Bicycles on Sidewalks – 224 Street from North Avenue to 122 Avenue The Staff liaison reported on the Council discussion and queries which arose at the January 9, 2018 Council Workshop meeting with regards to excluding bicycles on particular sidewalks and reducing the speed limit along 224 Street. There was discussion on the speed of roadways with existing bike lanes and concerns of other people powered modes of transportation being pushed from the sidewalk to the roadway. R/2018-005 It was moved and seconded That only bicycles be excluded from sidewalks along 224 Street from North Avenue to 122 Avenue. CARRIED Councillor Duncan - OPPOSED The Staff liaison advised that Council is seeking input on limiting the speed along 224 Street from 122 Avenue to North Avenue. There was discussion on reducing the speed in that particular stretch of road to 30 km/h and whether or not the current speed matches the road design. The Staff liaison advised of future plans to install a roundabout at 224 Street and 124 Avenue and there was discussion on passive traffic calming along 224 Street. R/2018-006 It was moved and seconded That the Active Transportation Advisory Committee support reducing the speed limit on 224 Street from North Avenue to 122 Avenue from 50 km/h to 30 km/h. CARRIED Active Transportation Advisory Committee Minutes July 25, 2018 Page 3 of 4 4.3. Speed limit consideration on Dewdney Trunk Road from 222 Street to 227 Street The Staff liaison advised that during the January 9, 2018 Council Workshop meeting, members of Council questioned the idea of reducing the speed limit along Dewdney Trunk Road from 222 Street to 227 Street. Further information on the matter was requested. Staff will forward Council reports and link to Council Workshop video for review and add the item to the next agenda for further discussion. 4.4. 2018 ATAC Work Plan The Staff liaison clarified capital projects and cycling funding. The Chair spoke to cycling infrastructure and the funding approved by Translink for the Major Bike Network. There was discussion on the flashing amber crosswalks installed along Dewdney Trunk Road and potential locations, guidelines and TAC standards for future installations. It was requested that the next agenda include a discussion on extending bike lanes along 240 Street from Dewdney Trunk Road to Lougheed and what can be accomplished with the existing road structure. The Council liaison suggested that the 2019 work plan include a review of current cycling facilities and infrastructure to determine a focus and recommendation from the committee. Another item suggested was a contest or draw to promote people powered modes of transportation to engage the community and encourage active transportation. Installation of a bike storage facility at the bus loop was discussed. The Staff liaison reviewed the process of the business planning model at the City of Maple Ridge. 4.5. Communities on the Move – Request for Endorsement The Chair reviewed the correspondence from HUB Cycling. There was discussion on Translink and its core mandate. R/2018-007 It was moved and seconded That the following recommendations be forwarded to Council: 1. That the City of Maple Ridge endorses the Communities on the Move Declaration published on the BC Alliance for Healthy Living's website. 2. That the City of Maple Ridge add its name to the growing list of endorsers of the Communities on the Move Declaration. CARRIED 4.6. DropBike Program Ms. Boekhorst introduced the program and shared her experience with DropBike in Kelowna. There was discussion on the program, bicycle parts, and popular spots in Maple Ridge where the program may work well. There was interest in learning more about the program and Ms. Boekhorst will bring additional information to a future meeting. Active Transportation Advisory Committee Minutes July 25, 2018 Page 4 of 4 5. CORRESPONDENCE - Nil 6. QUESTION PERIOD - Nil 7. ROUNDTABLE David Rush discussed the topic of an anti-idling campaign. The Staff liaison will provide previous City of Maple Ridge reports and research to members. Kino Roy reported on pedestrian maps installed at skytrain stations that show nearby points of interest and how far of a walk it is to reach them. There was discussion on how active transportation can be encouraged in Maple Ridge and the possibility of working with Translink to install pedestrian maps at bus stops around town. Kim McLennan noted an opportunity to work with the Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility and Inclusiveness Age-Friendly Initiative subcommittee to install location maps and signage at targeted sites around the city. Wayne Stevens spoke to promoting local tourism and advised of the passport program run by the City of Vancouver that encourages people to visit attractions and collect stamps. Mr. Stevens will investigate the program further as well as any existing apps available to promote local attractions and will report findings at a future meeting. 8. ADJOURNMENT – 8:47 pm. K. Roy, Chair /aa 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 To: Frank Quinn, <fquinn@mapleridge.ca> David Pollock P.Eng <dpollock@mapleridge.ca> Michael Canning <mcanning@mapleridge.ca> Rachel Ollenberger <rollenberger@mapleridge.ca> Purvez Irani <pirani@mapleridge.ca> Mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca> Maple Ridge Active Transportation Advisory Committee <aallen@mapleridge.ca> cc: Addie Anderson, Morningstar Homes / Polygon Homes <aanderson@mstarhomes.com> Re: 232nd Street / 2015-088-DP Polygon/Morningstar development August 13, 2018 Mayor and Council, City of Maple Ridge Engineering staff, The cycling and pedestrian infrastructure planned as part of the present road design for the Polygon/Morningstar development along Lougheed Highway and 232nd Street will pose serious safety issues for both people walking and people cycling. Before Public Hearing, at the request of Ms. Anderson as the representative of Polygon/Morningstar, our HUB Committee sent our letter of support for this development to Mayor and Council based on her assurances that:  Bike lanes would be part of the design throughout the development.  There would be ample opportunity for our HUB Cycling Committee to provide further feedback. However:  Our HUB Cycling Committee was given no opportunity to provide further feedback and was given no information about the road design until the design had already received final approval.  The final design shows infrastructure that contravenes best-practice design guidelines used widely by private and public sector practitioners. We strongly suggest that the City reconsiders the final road design for the reasons given above. Our HUB committee would appreciate a participatory role with the City and the developer to ensure safe cycling and pedestrian facilities are part of the design of this development. Without changes, we will unfortunately have to publicly retract our support for this development. Sincerely, Barry Bellamy, co-chair HUB Cycling Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Chapter JC/BB/IC/EoM/JL 20TH ANNIVERSARY 604.558.2002 info@bikehub.ca bikehub.ca 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 September 10, 2018 To Mayor and Council <mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca> cc: David Pollock, P.Eng. <dpollock@mapleridge.ca> Purvez Irani <pirani@mapleridge.ca> Michael Canning <mcanning@mapleridge.ca> Rachel Ollenberger <rollenberger@mapleridge.ca> Adrian Kopystynski <akopystynski@mapleridge.ca> Members of Active Transportation Advisory Committee <aallen@mapleridge.ca> Addie Anderson, Morningstar Homes <aanderson@mstarhomes.com> Re: 2015-297-RZ; Polygon/Morningstar development Lougheed Highway/232nd Street Mayor and Council, Regarding the above development, we have the following remarks. First of all, this development presented a very rare and unique opportunity for us at HUB Cycling to help ensure that, as part of this large development at close proximity to the downtown, high quality cycling infrastructure would be included in the design along two important arterials (involving the complete re-design of a section of one!), as well as the new connecting road between these arterials, at no cost to the taxpayer. Seizing any potential opportunity to improve cycling along arterials is very important, especially in a community like Maple Ridge, where due to topography and lack of a grid system, cycling connectivity is very challenging to achieve. We were thrilled to see the high level of engagement with our HUB Committee on the part of the developer, resulting in clear promises by the developer of "bike lanes throughout the development", and "many opportunities to provide feedback and suggestions throughout the development process". As you know, at the request of the developer, our HUB Cycling Committee sent a letter of support for this development to Mayor and Council prior to Public Hearing, based on these clear promises. We were truly impressed and encouraged by this opportunity to be invited to work with this developer in order to help design a walk- and bike friendly, livable and sustainable neighbourhood. We are happy to see that one of the promises made by the developer, i.e. physical separation of existing bike lanes on Lougheed Highway, will be fulfilled. Hopefully this will l 20TH ANNIVERSARY 604 .558.2002 info@bikehub.ca bikehub.ca HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 2 set the stage for further such improvements along Lougheed Highway east of the Town Core, so that more of this important #UnGapTheMap gap in our cycling network is fixed, and more people can more easily and safely get around town without a motor vehicle. Unfortunately, due to the promises made, we wrongly assumed that we would be informed of the "many opportunities" that would arise to provide further input. When we asked for an update in July, we were told that the design was already final: 232nd Street  Only one, southbound, bike lane was part of the design along 232nd Street, with the addition of a substandard 2 meter wide multi-use path (i.e. a slightly widened sidewalk) starting from the entrance to the lawn bowling club.  On the east side, a 2 meter wide multi-use path (again, this is basically a sidewalk which is slightly wider than normal) would be built to "accommodate" pedestrians and people on bikes. The multi-use paths did not conform to any of the commonly used minimum standards (see attachment A). We were told by the City that this was the chosen design because of space restrictions due to the ravine and creek on the east side, but no explanation was given why the road could not be pushed further to the west. A representative of the developer clarified that on the west side, the decision was made to maximize lot yield, which meant that no space would remain for a bike lane on the east side. This was not what we had been promised: "bike lanes throughout the development". We raised our objections. Swiftly, the City notified us that the design would be changed as follows:  No cycling facility on the east side of the road  A bi-directional 3 meter wide multi-use path on the west side of the road, from the entrance to the bowling/tennis club to Cottonwood Drive We were told that these changes were, once and for all, final. The result: Northbound people on bikes (the "strong and fearless" and "enthused and confident" types) will either avoid 232nd Street, or stay on the road, sharing a narrow 3.2 meter uphill car lane with cars and trucks, resulting in potential conflict with drivers of motor vehicles. Less confident people on bikes coming from Kanaka Way will likely prefer to continue to bike on the narrow 1.5 m sidewalk on the east side, for convenience, rather than dismount at the new crosswalk at Cottonwood and then ride along the multi-use path up to just north HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 3 of the northern edge of the development, then cross this arterial again mid-block to get back to the "right" side of the road in order to continue their journey. Southbound (downhill), people on bikes tend to move at fairly high speeds. They will find themselves sharing the path with people on foot, dogs, and other people on bikes, in both directions. Note that user conflict is most likely to occur during times of school travel. We've been told that this multi-use facility will eventually be extended to 116 Ave. We suspect this may actually even set the stage for potential extension beyond 116 Ave. Neither solution is satisfactory to us, however the latter is even less so than the first one:  A bi-directional shared facility is not appropriate in this location, in an increasingly urbanized area, on a sloping arterial, and in the vicinity of two schools.  Obviously, the shared use of a bi-directional path on a sloping road by people of all ages and abilities, with cars crossing at the new connecting collector road as well as the entrance to the bowling and tennis clubs (and possibly a new swimming pool in future?), as well as the entrance roads to existing strata developments to the south of this development, will lead to dangerous situations.  The added inconvenience to people on bikes, having to cross this arterial twice (once mid- block) in order to use the multi-use path.  Providing a facility on one side of the road only, leads to reduced accessibility for people on bikes, especially along arterials where opportunities to cross are infrequent, and crossing mid block adds danger. Bi-directional infrastructure We feel it's important to continue to raise awareness among Council members and City staff of the significant safety issues with regard to bi-directional cycling infrastructure in a more urban environment (in particular multi-use paths, which are generally less safe than bike-only infrastructure, see below). Bi-directional can work fine along more rural roads, with little traffic, and few side streets and driveways, but as pointed out, the context here is quite different. In spite of the concerns raised on multiple occasions, we continue to see more and more bi- directional facilities added in our community along busy streets in a more urban context:  the existing multi-use facility along Lougheed Highway between 216th Street and Laity Street, to be extended eventually all the way from 222nd Street to Maple Meadows Way (crossing major intersections at 216th, Laity, 207th and 203rd Streets, as well as various commercial- and other driveways),  cycle track on 203rd Street between Dewdney and Golden Ears Way/128th Ave,  240th Street between Hill Ave. and 104 Ave, HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 4  a planned multi-use bi-directional facility along 207th Street (we oppose this, and are awaiting the opportunity to give further feedback),  the planned bi-directional multi-use facility on 104 Ave. (we oppose this)  planned narrow multi-use (i.e. , by definition, bi-directional) facilities along both sides of 123 Ave. between 203rd Street and Laity Street. We understand that bike lanes will also be added along part of 123 Ave., where possible. We are awaiting the opportunity to see the design and give our feedback. A study1 we referred to in previous correspondence, has shown that cycling in the direction opposite to car traffic is on average eight times more dangerous than cycling in the direction of car traffic. It's critical to put people on bikes where drivers expect them to be. (driving is a complex enough task as it is!). Vélo Québec's Planning and Design for Pedestrians and Cyclists, recommends that: "On-road bike paths should preferably be unidirectional. Bi-directional paths offer effective safety between intersections but complicate traffic at intersections. In fact, they increase the number of conflict points between bicycles and turning vehicles." For further reading, we recommend this article by Mikael Colville-Anderson of the Copenhagenize blog: Explaining the Bi-directional Cycle Track Folly. Multi-use vs. bike-specific Multi-use paths improve perceived safety, especially for inexperienced people on bikes, but actual safety is worse than for bike-specific facilities: 1 Comparing the effects of infrastructure on bicycling injury at intersections and non -intersections using a case–crossover design, Harris et al HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 5 For future reference, attached are some examples of preferred uni-directional, protected bike lanes (attachment B). Cycling network Although the section of 232nd Street between Kanaka Way and 116 Ave. is not part of the cycling network according to the 2014 Transportation Plan, both arterials are #UnGapTheMap gaps, i.e. gaps that were identified by HUB Cycling as important gaps in our cycling network. This was the case even prior to the connecting road being added to the design of this development. The connecting road was added to the design as a result of the suggestion made at the October 2017 Active Transportation Advisory Committee meeting by the ATAC member with a cycling interest. The intention was to provide a level, convenient active transportation connection between Lougheed Highway and 232nd Street. The City decided to classify this road as a "collector" road. It's obvious that the addition of a brand new collector road will result in a change of traffic patterns. All this would have been ample justification, in our opinion, for a review of the need to further extend the designated bike route along 232nd Street from 116th Ave. to Kanaka • Multi-use paths 0 Major streets • • Bike-specific facilities Cycl • Les.s safe •----c::=======--~---===-------• Route Safety • re safe A study by Dr. KayTeschke et al . from UBC found a correlation between bike route preferences and actual safety. The graph shows that bike-specific routes are preferred and safer, in addition to cycle tracks, bike-only paths, multi-use paths, and residential street bike routes . HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 6 Way. We have been told that such a review will not take place until the next time the Transportation Plan will be reviewed. It's truly puzzling to our HUB Cycling Committee why such a review would only take place after a brand new collector road is built, when this road wasn't even in the 2014 Transportation Plan. Once 232nd Street is re-built to the design presently chosen by the City, it will be extremely unlikely that any changes will be made in future. New connecting road Rather than bike lanes on both sides of the road, the City opted for a multi-use facility on the north side of the road, with a traffic circle connecting to the local street into the development to the north. As the original intention of this connecting road was to provide a convenient, level connection for people on bikes and people walking, one would expect this connection to be convenient for both types of users. Our HUB Committee requested the City to provide a raised crossing at the traffic circle across the local street. We understand that instead of a convenient, relatively straight, raised crossing, people on bikes will be required to ride into the residential street to the north, on the sidewalk, get off their bikes in order to cross at the pedestrian crosswalk, and get back on their bikes on the other side of the street to ride south on the sidewalk back to the traffic circle, to be able to continue their way on the multi-use facility. This design fails people on bikes. In summary In summary, our HUB Cycling Committee is very disappointed that the promises made to us were not fulfilled. If we would have known the outcome, we would not have supported this development. Most sincerely, Jackie Chow HUB Cycling Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Chapter JC/BB/EoM/JL HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 7 Attachment A Commonly used standards for Multi-Use Paths  TAC (Transportation Association of Canada) standards: Recommended lower limit: 3 m Practical lower limit: 2.7 m Absolute lower limit: 2.4 m  City of Vancouver's Transportation Design Guidelines for AAA facilities: Recommended minimum for bi-directional bike lane: 3 m Recommends to create separate spaces for walking and cycling due to increased risk of collisions for multi-use pathways.  Alta Planning + Design's Rural Design Guide: Recommended minimum width for side path: 2.4 - 3.6 m (2.4 m being the absolute minimum), + 1.5 m minimum roadway separation. Roadway separation may be accommodated with the use of a physical barrier between the sidepath and the roadway. The barrier and end treatments should be crashworthy.  AASHTO Bicycle Facilities Guide: Recommended minimum width 10' (= 3 m). In very rare circumstances, a reduced width of 8' (2.4 m) may be used. Referenced in ANPRM on Shared Use Path Accessibility Guideline, page 5/9.  NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide: Gives no recommendations for shared paths. NACTO Urban Street Design Guide: Same. Recommended minimum for sidewalks: 6' (1.8 m). Where a sidewalk is directly adjacent to moving traffic, the desired minimum is 8 feet (2.4 m). HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 8 Attachment B Examples of uni-directional separated bike lanes Figure 1 - 105a Ave, Surrey Figure 2 - Example cheap parking protected bike lane with delineator posts HUB Cycling | 312 Main Street (2nd Floor), Vancouver BC, V6A 2T2 Page 9 Figure 3 - cheap separated bike lane design with delineator post from US DOT Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide Deli neator Posts . 10ft-~ft -. Typical . . . Sp 1ng ~ 3 ft Prmrred