It might still work out that the stats prove one lane is enough. But if the latent or induced demand (a known traffic management phenomenon) proves to be high with hordes of additional cyclists, then the one lane may not be enough.

The question will then be, covert another lane on this bridge or build separate bike / ped bridges and greater cost?

To cowardly to go for two bikes lanes; and too stupid to embrace even one…

The legacy of this council, if this keeps up, will be one of fantasy initiatives and pandering to its hardcore base, steeped social fascism.

Funny that. Sam did the exact same thing, within almost the exact same period of time…

I don’t like that, either, and I watch with glee on the rare occasions when a radar trap is operating at the south end of the Granville bridge (almost been caught once or twice myself). In response to your question, though, and at the risk of being thumpingly obvious, allow me to point out that bridge pedestrians are not required to walk in the *car* lanes (not yet, anyway).
gmgw

Apparently there is a “hidden evil-city planners handbook” then.

I’m definitely not making that up. I was consulting for an organization who were looking for a building to either move into, or buy.

I met with city planners on several occassions regarding the use/zoning we required and that was definitely what was told to us.

Although I’m tempted to put their names here, I don’t think that would be fair without talking to them again first.

Perhaps while I’m snooping around for that handbook!!

If there are any city planners out there, including Mr. Toderian, can you comment on the Burrard Slopes?

I agree with get a bell. Problem is it is almost more dangerous because pedestrians often scatter in an unpredictable manner. They often run into each other. Regarding the speed limit, the solution is separate paths. A 15kph is not a reasonable limit on the downhill sections. I’m not sure why people complain about cyclists when motorists on the bridge are usually going 40kph over the limit.

Reckless acts of self-regulation are counter-productive. Best slow down and use a bell instead.

Funny, I’m often tempted to do the same thing…in my car, to cyclists.

If there is a plan in place to phase out that light-industrial area into residential it would be in the “hidden – evil city planner agenda handbook”, because it’s definitely not what they tell people when you ask them directly.”

I guess you’ve been talking to different planners that the ones I’ve been talking to. For some years now, planners have been saying both to me and to nearby neighbourhood associations that it’s the City’s intention to gradually convert the Burrard Slopes to a residential/commercial mix (bizarrely, the predominant commercial development in the area lately seems to consist of luxury/exotic car dealerships). The residential conversion happening, if slowly (planning appears to be in no rush, for a change), and will continue to happen.

If you have a copy of that secret evil city planner handbook, I’d love to see it, but for the moment I’ll just continue to go with the vision for that area that those “other” planners have been quite openly discussing for at least a decade.
gmgw

Not to be…umm… critical or anything, McGee, but you’re a (potentially criminally) irresponsible goddamned idiot, and the kind of bicyclist who gives other bicyclists the reputation for arrogance and recklessness that many non-bicyclists ascribe to them. I was speaking of the narrow sidewalks of the Granville Bridge, where the cyclist/pedestrian mix is much more hazardous (partly because 90% of the cyclists on the bridge ignore any and all speed limits), and where behaviour such as your yours could easily lead to injury or even death. But the same principle applies anywhere: Have you ever once stopped to consider what might happen if the person you’re “brushing past”, startled by your sudden presence, was to lurch into your path? Would you feel vindicated if they lost their balance, stumbled off the sidewalk and fell in front of a rapidly oncoming car or under a bus? Or maybe pleased? “Great, that’s one less obstruction to slow me down! Friggin’ poky pedestrians, never lookin’ where they’re goin’…”. You remind me of the speeding biker who knocked down a (walking) friend of mine on the Stanley Park seawall a few years ago. She was left on the ground with a fractured tailbone, and the biker just kept going, giving the finger to witnesses who were yelling at him to stop. Bikers like him– and you– give all cyclists a bad name, and put us all– cyclists, pedestrians, drivers– in grave danger.

“One weekend there was a fund raising walk with a course that went across the bridge. The bridge wasn’t closed, but those damn fund raisers were walking 4 or 5 abreast. It was extremely annoying, not too mention disrespectful of cyclists and our rights.”

Arrogance. Phenomenal, unbelievable arrogance. “Disrespectful”?! Who the hell do you think you are? What gives you the right to act like this? Do you think that bicyclists possess some innate moral superiority that should entitle you to exclusive use of all public thoroughfares? Coupled with the adrenalin-fuelled aggression to which you’re clearly prone, your attitude makes you a ticking bomb. I just hope you’re not anywhere near me when it finally goes off. Do us all a favour (including responsible cyclists)– get the hell off the road, sell your bike, and buy a good pair of walking shoes. Or take the bus. You’ll quickly be seeing the world from a whole different perspective.
gmgw