Yeah, cycle use went up in the good weather and declined when the weather got worse. What we don’t have are any figures comparing the summer and fall of 2009 with earlier periods, prior to the creation of the bike lane. AFAIK, there are no figures to support the assertion that the bike lane resulted in increased cycle use. I think the City’s numbers also show that care use did not decline after installation of the bike lane, though, of course, we still don’t have comparable stats from previous years.

As for the second point, that may have been what the Mayor meant, but what he said was “We know from the Burrard Bridge…”. Perhaps he was simply misquoted?

Cycling increased 25% in the summer after the trail – it has since declined due to weather constrictions. Walking and driving stayed about the same. Where the new cyclists came from, I have no idea! Maybe off transit?

“As for making it safer, I recall that the final report did indicate that there was only one bike related accident last summer, as opposed to three the summer before, which is some evidence to support that assertion that the bike lane increased safety.”

Studies show that as more people cycle, cycling becomes safer and injuries are reduced. I’m sure that’s what Gregor was referring to – more general than Burrard only specifics. Google it.

The Bloedel & Farmyard cannot wait.  The arguments for not closing these facilities, revitalizing them & operating them in partnership with non-profit societies has been well made in the past 2 months.  Council & the Parks Board had better start listening to their constituents.  November 2011 is not far off.

The question could also be asked: why, with a $61m deficit, are bike lane projects in the budget at all this year?  If Bloedel & the Farmyard are not so called ‘core services’, neither are bike lanes [Burrard Bridge & Dunsmuir Viaduct].  The hundreds of thousands of dollars spent fro these two projects in this deficit year would go a long way to keep more libraries & community centres open, protect jobs &, keep the Bloedel & Farmyard open.

And if the city was serious about traffic crashes (mistakenly called “accidents” in the media and the public words) then they would declare a city wide 30 km/hr zone next week for the 2 months of the 2 Olympics.

Subject: The Canadian Press: Haste makes waste: cutting speed boosts drivers’ life expectancy: study
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gNAtKA9YCgErlhpUlPGYo0k3wbgA
TORONTO — Every hour spent behind the wheel represents a 20-minute loss in life expectancy because of the risk of being involved in a fatal motor vehicle accident, say researchers, who calculate that even a slight reduction in speed by the average driver could save lives….

BBC News – Most drivers ‘feel they are superior behind the wheel’
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8479393.stm

Most motorists fancy themselves as better drivers than others on the road, Canadian psychologists have found.
When Ottawa University researchers polled nearly 400 drivers ranging from the youngest to the very old, virtually all rated themselves favourably.
This was especially true when older drivers were used for comparison, even if the person questioned fell into that category themselves.
This bravado could lead to more accidents, the scientists warned. [ more ]

[ 20 mph is an arcane speed masurement, 20 miles per hour is the same as 32.2 km/hr ]

Subject: Effect of 20 mph traffic speed zones on road injuries in London, 1986-2006: controlled interrupted time series analysis — Grundy et al. 339: b4469 — BMJ
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/dec10_3/b4469

Published 10 December 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b4469
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b4469
[ From the Abstract. See full article and tables ]
….Results The introduction of 20 mph zones was associated with^ a 41.9% (95% confidence interval 36.0% to 47.8%) reduction in^ road casualties, after adjustment for underlying time trends.^ The percentage reduction was greatest in younger children and^ greater for the category of killed or seriously injured casualties^ than for minor injuries. There was no evidence of casualty migration^ to areas adjacent to 20 mph zones, where casualties also fell^ slightly by an average of 8.0% (4.4% to 11.5%).^

Conclusions 20 mph zones are effective measures for reducing^ road injuries and deaths.^

[ and from the public press, the popular version ]
BBC News – 20mph speed zones cut road injuries by 40%, study says
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8406569.stm
Page last updated at 00:03 GMT, Friday, 11 December 2009
20mph speed zones cut road injuries by 40%, study says
UK cities should have more 20mph speed zones, as they have cut road injuries by over 40% in London, a study claims.
In particular the number of children killed or seriously injured has been halved over the past 15 years, the British Medical Journal reported.
The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine study estimates 20mph zones have the potential to prevent up to 700 casualties in London alone.
At 20mph, it is estimated only one in 40 pedestrians is killed in a crash. [ more ]

What I *will* venture is that they have the opposite effect on motorists.

More police on bikes instead of patrol cars.

—
Consider that at a slow patrol crawl you see in the residential areas, they are going slower than most bicyclists.