UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Vancouver area bicycle advocacy groups : approaches and effectiveness Callister, Beth 1999

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1999-0477.pdf [ 7.91MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0089112.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0089112-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0089112-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0089112-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0089112-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0089112-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0089112-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0089112-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0089112.ris

Full Text

VANCOUVER AREA BICYCLE ADVOCACY GROUPS: APPROACHES AND EFFECTIVENESS by Beth Callister B . S c , The Ohio State University, 1995 THESIS S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T O F T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R T S in T H E F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S S C H O O L O F C O M M U N I T Y A N D R E G I O N A L P L A N N I N G We accept this thesis as confirming to the required standard T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A September, 1999 © Elizabeth Callister, 1999 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. 1 further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Cbr^^ ( <\ $L&^ rvTCtV ^ C A f Y X v A Q The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date "**frjfS U T ] DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT The bicycle has been proven in many European cities and in some North American cities to be a viable transportation alternative to the car, whether used solely for short distance trips or in combination with transit for longer trips. The topic of this thesis is how bicycle advocacy groups work to get decision-makers and policies to recognize and reflect the needs of bicycle users and commuters and to support bicycle ridership as a viable alternative to the private automobile. The theoretical question explored is what elements contribute to effective lobbying on behalf of cyclists in local government decision-making processes! Public policy literature presents case studies of particular interest groups influencing various phases of the decision-making process. These studies tell about how groups have adapted to different political systems and have exercised influence. However, there has been little research into the types and roles of bicycle advocacy groups, with analysis of their effectiveness in local government decision-making processes. It would be useful for bicycle advocates and bicycle planners to know how bicycle advocacy groups can be most effective. Ten local area cycling transportation advocacy groups are described; Better Environmentally Sound Transportation, Vancouver Area Cycl ing Coalition, British Columbia Cycl ing Coalition, Downtown Cyclists Network, Burrard Street Working Group, the A M S Bike Co-op, Bicycle People, Critical Mass, People Not Cars, and Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels. The influence of six of these groups are examined in detail through interviews with Cheeying Ho (Executive Director, B E S T ) , Richard Campbell (President , V A C C ) , Francis van Loon (President, B C C C ) , Guy Wera (Spokesperson, Bicycle People), Scott Nelson (Spokesperson, B S W G ) , and Ted Buehler (President, Bike Co-op). Additional interviews were conducted with area decision-makers and planners. The conclusions drawn in this thesis are 1) the combined presence of different types of advocacy groups and approaches increases any one group's influence over policy, 2) the factors that inhibit bicycle advocacy groups' effectiveness and influence tend to be associated more with external factors than to defects of bicycle advocacy groups themselves, and 3) the lack of cycling education and awareness among the public limits the implementation and success of cycling transportation policies. T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S ABSTRACT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vi LIST OF ACRONYMS vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 P R O B L E M S T A T E M E N T 1 1.3 C A S E STUDY - V A N C O U V E R A R E A B I C Y C L E A D V O C A C Y GROUPS 3 1.4 R E S E A R C H G O A L A N D OBJECTIVES 4 1.5 R E S E A R C H METHODS 4 7.5.7 Interviews 5 1.6 O V E R V I E W OF CHAPTERS 7 CHAPTER 2 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ADVOCACY 8 2.1 B A C K G R O U N D OF TRANSPORTATION P L A N N I N G 8 2.2 PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL B I C Y C L E TRANSPORTATION P L A N N I N G 10 2.3 B I C Y C L E P L A N N I N G APPROACHES 12 2.4 B I C Y C L E TRANSPORTATION P L A N N I N G IN V A N C O U V E R 14 2.4.1 Existing Municipal and Regional Policies 14 2.4.2 Existing Provincial Policies 16 2.5 POLICY INFLUENCES 17 CHAPTER 3 ADVOCACY THEORY 19 3.1 POLICY COMMUNITIES 19 3.2 A D V O C A C Y ORGANIZATIONS : 20 3.2.1 Approaches to Bicycle Advocacy 23 CHAPTER 4 CASE STUDY 26 4.1 C Y C L I N G A D V O C A C Y IN V A N C O U V E R 26 4.2 HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF B I C Y C L E A D V O C A C Y IN V A N C O U V E R 27 4.3 B I C Y C L E A D V O C A C Y GROUPS.. . . 32 4.3.1 Bicycle People 32 4.3.2 Better Environmentally Sound Transportation (BEST) 33 4.3.3 Cycling BC 34 4.3.4 British Columbia Cycling Coalition (BCCC) 35 4.3.5 Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition (VACC) 36 4.3.6 Burrard Street Working Group (BSWG) 36 4.3.7 AMS Bike Co-op 37 4.4 B I C Y C L E A D V I S O R Y C O M M I T T E E (BAC) 38 CHAPTER 5 ANALYSIS 40 5.1 GROUP G O A L S 40 5.2 A P P R O A C H 41 5.3 O R G A N I Z A T I O N A L STRUCTURE 42 iii 5.4 EFFECTIVENESS 44 5.4.1 Effectiveness As Discussed By Groups 45 5.4.2 Effectiveness As Discussed By Decision-Makers 46 5.5 COMMUNICATION 47 5.6 NETWORKING 47 5.7 THE PROCESS OF CYCLING TRANSPORTATION POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 49 5.8 THE ROLE OF THE MUNICIPALITY IN BICYCLE POLICY AND PLANNING 50 5.9 THE ROLE OF BICYCLE ADVOCACY IN THE LOCAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS 51 5.10 WHAT IS GOOD PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS? 53 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 55 6.1 CONCLUSIONS 55 6.2 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY 62 WEB SITES 65 APPENDIX 1 INTERVIEWS 66 APPENDIX 2 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 67 APPENDIX 3 INTERVIEW RESPONSES VANCOUVER BICYCLE ADVOCACY GROUPS 68 RESPONSE SUMMARY 72 APPENDIX 4 INTERVIEW RESPONSES PLANNERS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS 74 RESPONSE SUMMARY 78 APPENDIX 5 MOTH STAKEHOLDER LIST 80 APPENDIX 6 A PERSPECTIVE ON VANCOUVER TRANSPORTATION 81 APPENDIX 7 PENDER STREET BIKE LANES 82 APPENDIX 8 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT OF JULY 15,1999 84 APPENDIX 9 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES INTERVIEW 89 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Group Characteristics and Policy Capacity 22 Table 2: Classification of Approaches to Cycling Advocacy 24 Table 3: Classification of Vancouver Cycling Groups 25 LIST O F FIGURES Figure 1: Vancouver Bikeway System 15 Figure 2: Vancouver Bicycle Advocacy Tactics and Positions 25 Figure 3: Major Downtown Streets, including Burrard Street 29 Figure 4: The University Endowment Lands and the City of Vancouver 30 Figure 5: Critical Mass Ride Lion's Gate Bridge June 27, 1999 31 Figure 6: Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels 31 Figure 7: Billboard Doctoring, PNC 31 vi LIST OF ACRONYMS AMS A l m a Mater Society AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials BAC Bicycle Advisory Committee BC British Columbia BCA A British Columbia Automobile Association BCCC British Columbia Cycling Coalition BEST Better Environmentally Sound Transportation BSWG Burrard Street Working Group DAFF Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels DCN Downtown Cyclists Network FHWA Federal Highway Association GNCC Greater Nanaimo Cycling Coalition GVCC Greater Victoria Cycl ing Coalition GVRD Greater Vancouver Regional District GVTA Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority ICBC Insurance Corporation of British Columbia MoTH Ministry of Transportation and Highways MVA Motor Vehicle Act PAC Public Advisory Committee PNC People Not Cars RCMP Royal Canadian Mounted Police SPEC Society Promoting Environmental Conservation US United States VACC Vancouver Area Cycl ing Coalition VBC Vancouver Bicycle Club A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S Thanks to; M y committee Peter Boothroyd, Mark Al l ison, and Tom Hutton Scott Nelson and Cheryl Mackniak who met with me and offered ideas and encouragement as I was first formulating ideas for this thesis. Transportation Alternatives in New York City for my introduction into the alternative transportation advocacy world and to Northwest Environment Watch in Seattle for The Car in The City and their continued support. Jennifer Franks, Brian Menunous, and Masa Alkire for their help at my defense. Many thanks to the Vancouver area cycling community; especially Cheeying Ho , Richard Campbell, Francis van Loon, Guy Wera, Russell Adams, Ted Buehler, Peter Stary, John Whistler, and Lee Henderson. Special thanks to my family and friends, whom I could not do without. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION "We need to become more self-conscious of different styles of organizing and of the way organizing strategies must be adapted to different conditions and constituencies, and the way these local organizing efforts do or do not succeed in making impact on structures of power." (Cloward and Piven, p. xviii) 1.1 INTRODUCTION The bicycle has been proven in many European cities and in some North American cities to be a viable transportation alternative to the car, whether used solely for short distance trips, or in combination with transit for longer trips. How bicycle advocacy groups work to get decision-makers and policies to recognize and reflect the needs of bicycle users and commuters and support bicycle ridership as a viable alternative to the private automobile is the topic of this thesis. Generally, the goal of this research is to identify some of the approaches used by advocacy groups to work effectively with local government. 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT Data, calculations, research, and literature about the amount of resources used and pollution produced as a result of ever increasing automobile use and dependence, and the land-use patterns and living habits that perpetuate this dependence, are now widely available and becoming more commonly known. 1 As a result of this knowledge of the negative impacts of excessive automobile use, an assumption underlying this thesis is that changing people's transportation habits is crucial to the movement toward achieving more sustainable places. Simply, it is believed that the process of reducing the amount of energy and resources consumed in one's daily life wi l l necessarily contribute to limiting our 'ecological footprint' and wi l l , therefore, make our existence somewhat more sustainable than before. Transportation planning in North American cities has been dominated by policies and decision-making catered to the private automobile and massive road and highway construction and alternative modes of transportation have been neglected and underrepresented in transportation planning policies. As a result the true benefits of the bicycle, one of the most 1 Relevant titles include: Cities and Automobile Dependence (Newman and Kenworthy), Our Ecological Footprint (Wackernagel and Rees), Toward Sustainable Communities (Roseland), Alternatives to the Automobile (Lowe), The Car in the City (Durning), and The Geography of Nowhere (Kunstler) 1 benign forms of urban transport, have been little recognized by the majority of people in North American cities. In the last 25 years, cycling, and other modes of transportation that are alternative to the car, have been promoted as a reaction against the impacts of private automobile use rather than as legitimate transportation modes themselves (Lee, 1973). The lack of recognition by planners and citizens of the bicycle as a legitimate and viable mode of transportation in North American cities, combined with the bicycle's excellence as a sustainable form of transportation, speaks to the importance and challenge of incorporating bicycle transportation planning into transportation planning. 2 In more recent years, many provinces and municipalities in Canada have produced bicycle plans that attempt to legitimize the use of bicycles for transportation. Bicycle plans are usually the result of two prior policy development processes. First, a comprehensive plan is developed as a vision for the future, emphasizing livability and sustainability agendas. Comprehensive plans become a guide for planning and development. In comprehensive plans, transportation is generally identified as a key intervention point in efforts to change the patterns of car dependence and minimize the related negative impacts. From comprehensive plans more specific strategic transportation plans (STPs) are developed. STPs usually prioritize 'alternative' transportation (walking, and bicycle and transit) in recognition of the vast problems resulting from the over emphasis and dependence on the private automobile in past transportation and urban planning. Once a strategic transportation plan is approved a bicycle plan, specifically geared toward facilitating and promoting bicycle transportation, w i l l be developed. Of interest to this author is the extent and effect of input from people knowledgeable about cycling on the above stages of local policy development and implementation. Decisions made by politicians are generally affected by their perception of public opinion (Sammer, 1997). Community, interest groups, and advocacy groups affect politicians' views of public opinion. Therefore, understanding how these groups organize to influence politicians and planners is important to ensuring the development and implementation of transportation plans that fully support alternative modes of transportation. 2 Marcia Lowe discusses the role of the bicycle in transportation as it relates to sustainability in The Bicycle: Vehicle for a Small Planet 2 There are many case studies of particular interest groups influencing various phases of the decision-making process (Pross 1992, 86). These studies tell how groups have adapted to different political systems and have exercised influence. However, there has been little research into the types and roles of bicycle advocacy groups, with analysis of their effectiveness in local government decision-making processes. It would be useful for bicycle advocates and bicycle planners to know how bicycle advocacy groups can be most effective. The theoretical question in need of exploration is what elements contribute to effective lobbying by cycling advocacy groups in local government decision-making processes'! This is the knowledge area this thesis hopes to contribute to through a case study of bicycle advocacy in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 1.3 C A S E S T U D Y - V A N C O U V E R A R E A B I C Y C L E A D V O C A C Y G R O U P S The City of Vancouver is simultaneously considered by some a bicycle friendly city and a city with poor cycling facilities (relative to cities such as Toronto, Montreal, and Victoria). In the last five years there has been an increase in the number of cycling advocacy groups pressing decision-makers. Vancouver, now home to a number of organized groups advocating for bicycle transportation, offers an interesting case study of the influence of bicycle advocacy groups over transportation policy. Ten local area cycling transportation advocacy groups are described in this thesis; Better Environmentally Sound Transportation (BEST), Vancouver Area Cycl ing Coalition ( V A C C ) , British Columbia Cycl ing Coalition ( B C C C ) , Downtown Cyclists Network ( D C N ) , Burrard Street Working Group (BSWG) , the A M S Bike Co-op, Bicycle People, Critical Mass, People Not Cars (PNC), and Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels ( D A F F ) . A t present, these groups comprise the total number of cycling advocacy groups lobbying for cycling transportation issues in the Vancouver area. The influence of six of these groups are examined in detail through interviews with representatives from B E S T , V A C C , B C C C , Bicycle People, B S W G , and the Bike Co-op. The information obtained from these interviews forms the basis for analysis in answering the thesis' theoretical question. 3 1.4 R E S E A R C H G O A L A N D O B J E C T I V E S This analysis focuses on the experiences of bicycle advocacy groups in one city and is intended to provide insight into the ways in which bicycle advocacy groups influence the local government decision-making process related to cycling policy and planning. In reaching this goal the objectives of this thesis are to: 1. Identify the goals, approaches, and organizational structures of six formally organized bicycle advocacy groups in Vancouver, British Columbia. 2. Explore how decisions involving cycling are made in the city of Vancouver. 3. Identify what, in the minds of cycling advocates and planners, are the important elements that constitute good bicycle planning. 4. Describe the role bicycle advocacy groups play in the local government decision-making process in Vancouver. 5. Determine what are the common factors that contribute to and inhibit advocacy groups' effectiveness and influence on local cycling policy. 1.5 R E S E A R C H M E T H O D S Two categories of methods are used in this research, observation and interviews. 3 The lobbying activities of the Vancouver cycling community were observed daily on the B E S T listserve over a period of seven months, from January to July 1999. In general, interviews are used for study of individual perceptions, attitudes, and motivations. Interviews provide expert knowledge and opinions of the research topic and offer insight into the motives, history, and process behind the relationship between bicycle advocacy groups and local policy development and implementation unavailable in surveys or reports (Babbie, 1992). The advantages of interviews are that the responses are spontaneous and highly specific and concrete; disadvantages are that it is difficult to use interviews for measurement and difficult to do comparisons between interviews (Singha 1989, 76). 3 A literature review was conducted to set up the problem statement, research questions, conceptual framework, and to research the scope and background of issue. 4 1.5.1 Interviews Interviews for this thesis were conducted with people from; 1) Area bicycle advocacy groups; • Cheeying Ho, Executive Director, B E S T • Richard Campbell, President , V A C C • Francis van Loon, President, B C C C • Guy Wera, Spokesperson, Bicycle People • Scott Nelson, Spokesperson, B S W G • Ted Buehler, President, Bike Co-op 2) The Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee, • John Whistler, former chair 1990-1996 3) Decision-makers and government planners; • Doug Louie, Engineering Department, City of Vancouver • Gordon Price, Vancouver City Councillor • Ken Kuo, Transit Service Planner, Implementation Planning Department, TransLink and member of the G V R D Municipal Bicycle Committee • Katherine McCune, Development Approvals Person, Lower Mainland District, Ministry of Transportation and Highways and member of the G V R D Municipal Bicycle Committee • Alan Callander, Policy Analyst, Highway Planning and Policy Branch, Ministry of Transportation and Highways and member of the G V R D Municipal Bicycle Committee Decision-makers and government planners were interviewed in order to develop a sense of how they perceive the effectiveness and influence bicycle advocacy groups have over transportation policy. The decision-makers and government planners interviewed were selected based on their direct involvement with bicycle planning in the Vancouver area. Although the focus of this thesis is on the City of Vancouver, a sense of the regional and provincial perspective was sought as well . It is recognized by the researcher that limiting the selection of government representatives to those who are involved and who support bicycle planning also 5 limits the perceptive of what is considered by government representatives as effective bicycle advocacy. The interviews for this thesis were semi-structured. Two separate sets of questions were asked; one set for the advocacy groups and the Bicycle Advisory Committee, and one set for the representatives from the government agencies (see Appendix 2 for list of interview questions). However, during each interview the set of questions was not strictly followed. This allowed for the sharing of anecdotal information and a broader insight into what may influence the activities and effectiveness of bicycle advocacy groups. The questions asked of the decision-makers and government planners first addressed their opinion of good planning for cyclists and good cycling policy, the transportation policy process, and their role in bicycle planning. The questions then addressed their interactions with bicycle advocacy groups. The questions asked of the advocacy groups focused first on the goals, approaches, organizational structure, and communication within the group, and then on their perceived effectiveness, their relationship with decision-makers, their role in the decision-making process, and their opinions of what is good planning and policy for cyclists. The representative from the Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee was asked the same questions as the advocacy groups. Although the committee is advisory and is a part of the government structure, it is a committee that formed out of advocacy. The questions asked of the advocacy groups encompass the same questions asked of the agencies, with additional questions specific to goals, approach, and role of the committee. Each person interviewed was asked whether they wanted their interview kept confidential. None of the interviewees wanted their interviews kept confidential and each person gave the researcher permission to use quotes from their interview. 6 1.6 OVERVIEW OF CHAPTERS Including the introductory chapter, this thesis is organized into six chapters. First the theoretical framework is established, then the case study is described, then the information obtained during the interviews are analyzed, and finally the thesis is concluded with a discussion of observations and recommendations for future research. Chapter 2 describes bicycle transportation planning and is divided into five sections; Background of Transportation, Principles of Successful Bicycle Transportation Planning, Bicycle Planning Approaches, Bicycle Transportation Planning in Vancouver, and Policy Influences Chapter 3 discusses policy communities, advocacy organizations, and approaches to bicycle advocacy. Chapter 4 introduces the case study, describes the historical background of Vancouver bicycle advocacy, describes the goals, approaches, and organizational structures of the six cycling advocacy groups interviewed, and introduces the Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee and the planners and decision-makers interviewed. Chapter 5 establishes an evaluation framework and then analyzes the factors contributing to or inhibiting the success of Vancouver area bicycle advocacy groups. Chapter 6 draws conclusions, discusses implications, and makes recommendations for further research. 7 CHAPTER 2 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ADVOCACY 2.1 BACKGROUND OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING The process of urban transportation planning evolved in the 1950s as a systematic method for addressing urban transportation problems. The general framework of the urban transportation planning process derived from the pioneer urban transport studies in Detroit and Chicago in the mid to late 1950s. This process had four principle characteristics - quantification, comprehensiveness, systems thinking, and scientific approach (Tolley and Turton, 1995). According to Tolley and Turton (1995) the process was initially intended to be comprehensive enough that no one mode was supported over any other. However, this era was characterized by the belief that the reason for congestion was lack of road space and the logical answer was thought to be more road construction and the removal of barriers to automobile travel. As a result, the private automobile became the transportation mode most planned for. In the late 1960s and early 1970s movements formed against transportation planning and large-scale road building programs, such as the anti-freeway movements in Toronto (Spadina Expressway) and Vancouver (Georgia/Strathcona). The transportation planning process was no longer seen as only a technical exercise to be left to the expert. Social and environmental issues were now considered important. The "systems approach" to the analysis of transportation problems was criticized for the narrow conceptual base of methods, inflexibility in the structure of the process, lack of theoretical development, and lack of responsiveness to the changing demands of politicians (Banister, 1994). According to Banister (1994), theoretical criticisms of transportation planning began in the 1960s and 1970s with the growth of car ownership and road investment. Tolley and Turton (1995) defines the practice of transportation policy as one which assures adequate transportation capacity and efficient operations to meet the needs generated by an area's geographic array of activities. Traditional transportation planning has focused on increasing mobility and efficiency, which has meant building more road capacity. With attention being drawn to ecological sustainability and the negative effects of pollution from automobile emissions, the dilemma between increasing levels of mobility, as dictated by traditional transportation planning and engineering, and the new political objective to create more 8 sustainable transportation systems is now at the forefront of transportation policy (Banister 1994, Tolley and Turton 1995). The legacy of traditional transportation planning has been an underlying emphasis on increasing personal mobility rather than accessibility. This has resulted in concern for one mode of transportation (the private automobile), a neglect of the relationship between transportation and land-use patterns, and a rise in energy costs and pollution. In progressive transportation planning mobility is being replaced by accessibility, a reflection of the acknowledgment of the interdependence of transportation and land-use. In order to move toward sustainability, urban form and land-use, and behavior and lifestyle have to be compatible. New frameworks, such as Environmental Traffic Management, have been proposed in recognition of the relationships between speed, access, environment, and quality of urban life (Tolley and Turton, 1995). The major components of these types of frameworks are the promotion of bicycling, walking, public transport, and traffic calming and reduction. Nations that can afford to accommodate the automobile, and have the conditions that make it convenient, are less likely to emphasize the use of bicycles for transportation. Alternatively, nations that either cannot afford to accommodate automobiles (such as China, India, and many African countries) or have the money but do not have the space to make automobiles more convenient (such as Japan and Holland) use a greater proportion of cycling transportation (Replogle, 1983). Additionally, countries that provide stronger support for dedicated cycling facilities (such as Holland, Germany, and Denmark) show higher bicycle use than countries that have few facilities for cyclists (such as England, Spain, Canada, and the United States). Even within British Columbia, cities such as Victoria, where more cycling facilities are available, cycling has reached 5% of the modal split. 4 Whereas Vancouver, with fewer cycling facilities, cycling is at 2% of the modal split. A crucial condition for wide-spread bicycle use is increasing the convenience of cycling relative to other modes (Forester 1994, 33). How we make automobile use less convenient than cycling directly relates to accessibility, land-use patterns, and urban design, rather than individual income, level of motorization, or climate (Newman and Kenworthy 1989, Durning 1996, and Replogle 1983). 4 Modal split refers to the percent of trips made by each mode - walking, cycling, transit, automobiles - for a defined period. 9 The recognition of the need for broader economic, social, and ecological goals and for a more integrated approach to transportation planning has helped build a framework within which cycling can be developed as an important mode of transportation, particularly in the urban context (Hudson, 1982). Engineers, planners, and politicians are starting to realize that transportation planning should be based on accessibility, or reducing the need to travel long distances for daily needs, thus reducing the need to rely of the private automobile, and thereby increasing the viability of walking, cycling, and transit. Vancouver is considered a city which can be a model for more sustainable transportation practices with its mixed land-use and relatively compact density (Durning, 1996). It is this type of land-use that makes driving inconvenient and cycling, walking, and transit more convenient. Additional criteria for the success of alternative transportation include policy, allocation of funds and resources, and dedicated lobbying efforts. 2.2 PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING Bicycling magazine ranked North American cities according to which are best for cycling. Its first 'Best Cycl ing Cities Award ' was launched in 1990, the magazine revisited the cities in 1995, and then reassessed them in 1999. The magazine based their 1999 ranking on an evaluation of cycling infrastructure (such as marked bike lanes, municipal bike racks, bicycle access to bridges and public transportation, employment of a local government bicycle coordinator, area cycling advocacy efforts, bike safety programs, and a budget for cycling project) and local cycling culture (for example, the number of organized rides, races and informal group rides, easy access to trails, good bike shops, and presence of active cycling clubs.). They also talked to government cycling coordinators, bike advocates, urban planners and geographers, and experienced cyclists. These are the elements considered necessary by Bicycling to create a good environment for cyclists. Bicycle transportation planning typically encompasses four areas, known as the 4 Es, engineering, education, encouragement and enforcement (Forester 1994, Louie 1999, Vancouver Comprehensive Bicycle Plan 1988, Whistler 1999). Actions taken in different cities to plan for cycling have varied from the development of education and publicity programs to the complete segregation of bicycle traffic, as epitomized by routes in Tilburg and Hague, Holland (Hudson, 1982). 10 Six principles of planning for cyclists are outlined, as follows, in Bicycle Planning (Hudson, 1982). 1. Plans to improve cycling conditions should be integrated into all transport plans. 2. A n appropriate administrative framework, allowing for co-ordination between city departments, levels of government, and interest groups, is a prerequisite for integrated bicycle planning. 3. The aim of planning for cyclists is not a product. Provisions w i l l require the use of existing infrastructure and the construction of special facilities. 4. Cyclists and drivers need to recognize a common set of rules. Training, education and enforcement are as important as physical planning and design. 5. Planning for cyclists is an on going process. Maintenance of facilities and the monitoring and assessment of their performance must ensure continuing safe and efficient travel for cyclists. 6. A bicycle perspective must permeate any planning for cyclists. The U S Federal Highway Administration ( F H W A , 1993) identified 10 indicators of successful bicycle programs consistent with Hudson's principles of bicycle planning; 1. Increased bicycling 2. Accident reductions 3. Development of user-friendly infrastructure 4. Significant expenditures 5. Staff levels 6. Education and public information outreach 7. Events 8. Integration into routine government operations 9. Publications/maps 10. Development of practical planning documents The three elements found most common to places where bicycling is popular are; a full-time program manager, supportive elected officials and professionals within government agencies, and an active and organized citizenry, "usually exemplified by the presence of a citizens' action committee of some kind" ( F H W A 1993, 35). 11 2.3 B I C Y C L E P L A N N I N G A P P R O A C H E S The two most basic approaches to bicycle planning are segregation and integration. Forester (1984) categorizes these approaches as the 'cyclist-inferiority superstition' and the 'vehicular-cycling principle'. Hudson (1982) describes three approaches: segregated, software, and integrated. The segregation approach involves the provision of cycle routes segregated from other vehicular traffic. The integration approach leads to some confusion. Forester's integration approach is strictly opposed to separate bike paths and any demarcation in roads that would indicate a separate space in the road for cyclists (such as a bike lane). Other discussions (e.g. Hudson 1982, 11) use the word integration in a more holistic sense, where the aim of the approach is to create a network of facilities made up of the existing road system and appropriately located special cycling facilities (assumed to mean bike lanes and separate bike paths). Forester is an adamant proponent of cycling transportation engineering, where the cyclist is treated like any other road user and the bicycle as any other vehicle. Forester asserts the object of cycling transportation is to attain a safe and efficient cycling transportation system, based on present and mid-range demand. He is extremely critical of the above F H W A indicators and insists that bicycle policies over-emphasize facility building with the objective of attracting "millions of people who don't currently cycle, who have no intention of starting, and with no knowledge of how to do it". Even if the actual purpose is to produce a successful cycling transportation system, producing a bike-lane system won't accomplish that. It limits the routes deemed safe, it falsely persuades people to rely on it for safety when it doesn't provide safety, and it falsely persuades them to believe that they can use it safely with only a beginner's level of skill. By doing so it prevents them from learning how to ride safely and from developing confidence in their ability, and therefore continues making them feel inferior to motor traffic and continues the high accident rate that that feeling promotes. (Forester 1994, 38) Also in an effort to de-emphasize facility building, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ( A A S H T O ) states in its Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (1991); 12 Bicycle facility planning is commonly thought of as the effort undertaken to develop a separate bikeway system composed completely of bicycle paths and lanes all interconnected and spaced closely enough to satisfy all travel needs of bicyclists. In fact, such systems can be unnecessarily expensive and do not provide for the vast majority of bicycle travel. A A S H T O further states that existing highways, often with relatively inexpensive improvements, must serve as the base system to provide for the travel needs of cyclists. Thus, their opinion is that bike paths and lanes can augment the existing system. While not altogether shunning separate bicycle facilities, as Forester does, A A S H T O asserts that bicycle transportation planning is more than planning for bikeways but is an effort that should consider many alternatives to provide for safe and efficient bicycle travel. The challenge in bicycle transportation planning is that cyclists do not form a homogenous group, but rather there are cyclists of a wide range of age, ability, experience, and traffic judgement all cycling for different purposes. Unti l recently, cyclists in Vancouver heavily debated what they should be lobbying for in cycling policy and planning. The debate was between integration (the Forester model) and separation (the European model); "some cyclists want nice quite paths off the main roads, while others want to cycle on the main roads" (Campbell, pc 1999). A whole generation of cyclists and engineers have been indoctrinated with Forester's philosophy that cyclists do best when they are treated like cars, while at the same time the perception of there being a high risk factor associated with cycling in roadways has kept casual cyclists demanding separated bike paths (Nelson, pc 1999). The conclusion in the Vancouver cycling community is that facilities are needed to accommodate the range of ability among cyclists (Buehler, Campbell, and Nelson, pc 1999). A cycling planning strategy adopted in Perth, Australia encapsulates the combination of facilities used to support cyclists. Local area trips, within 5 km of home, are accommodated by cycling on local streets and on separate bike paths. Inter-district trips, work trips within 15 km of home, are on roads and highways. Metro-wide trips, within 50 km of home, are accommodated by the combination of bike and rail or bike and bus (Campbell and Adams, 1989). 13 2.4 B I C Y C L E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N P L A N N I N G I N V A N C O U V E R The City of Vancouver, although considered a bicycle friendly city, in part because of its relatively compact land-use patterns, is simultaneously considered a city with poor cycling facilities. In the opinion of local cycling advocates, even with the extensive bikeway network throughout the city, Vancouver is lagging behind other cities such as Victoria, Toronto, Montreal, Seattle, and Portland in regard to bike infrastructure and facilities ( B E S T listserve, 1999). For example, Vancouver does not have a full time bicycle coordinator on staff at the city, has no bike lanes in its downtown (the first downtown bike lane was recently approved by council), and has bike racks on only a few bus routes throughout the city. The transportation and bicycle planning policies in place in Vancouver provide the necessary foundation for improved cycling conditions within the city. 2.4.1 Exis t ing M u n i c i p a l and Regional Policies Vancouver first officially acknowledged the importance of bicycle planning in 1988 with the publication of the Vancouver Comprehensive Bicycle Plan. The plan's fundamental approach is to integrate cyclists into the existing transportation network, an approach heavily influenced by the bicycle engineering philosophy prescribed by John Forester. Forester made a presentation to the city of Vancouver during this time and is a main reference in the bicycle plan. Proof of this influence is found on page 3 of the bicycle plan; "The safest and most cost effective method of providing the cyclist with direct and convenient access to their destination is through shared usage of our existing transportation network". The impetus for the bicycle plan was the urging of the Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee and the 1985 GVRD Origin and Destination Study, which at the time helped legitimatize cycling transportation. The Origin and Destination Study identified that approximately 2.3% of all vehicle trips in the Vancouver Central Metropolitan Area were made by bicycle and 85% of all cycling trips made on an average weekday were made for non-recreational purposes, such as commuting and shopping. In 1990, the Ci ty 's Clouds of Change report became the first broad city document to recognize cycling as an important component of the transportation system. In 1992, Vancouver's Bicycle Network Study examined four options to pursue in developing its bicycle program; integration on arterial streets, enhanced integration on local 14 streets, b i k e l a n e s , a n d b i k e pa ths . T h e s t u d y r e c o m m e n d s " e n h a n c e d l o c a l i n t e g r a t i o n a l o n g s ide-s t ree t s p a r a l l e l to a r t e r i a l s t ree t s" as the o p t i o n the c i t y s h o u l d p u r s u e f o r i t s b i c y c l e n e t w o r k . T h i s o p t i o n w a s b e l i e v e d to p r o v i d e the m o s t i n c e n t i v e f o r e n c o u r a g i n g m o r e p e o p l e to c y c l e . 5 A l t h o u g h r e c r e a t i o n a l of f -s t ree t r ou t e s w e r e a l s o p r o p o s e d a n d b i k e l a n e s w e r e to be c o n s i d e r e d w h e r e a p p r o p r i a t e , the b i c y c l e n e t w o r k i n V a n c o u v e r i s e s s e n t i a l l y s o l e l y c o m p r i s e d o f m a r k e d ( w i t h s i g n a g e ) r ou t e s a l o n g s ide - s t r ee t s . 6 T h e c i t y ' s f i r s t p a i n t e d b i k e l a n e w a s a p p r o v e d i n 1 9 9 7 ( a l o n g S W M a r i n e D r i v e ) a n d i s n o w n e a r c o m p l e t i o n . I n 1 9 9 9 , the c i t y a p p r o v e d i ts f i r s t p a i n t e d b i k e l a n e d o w n t o w n (a s e g m e n t a l o n g P e n d e r S t ree t ) s c h e d u l e d to b e b u i l t w i t h i n the yea r . Figure 1: Vancouver Bikeway System 5 The study states that majority of public input favored a combination of the four options for a city-wide bicycle network. On this basis, the study could have recommended a combined approach as the preferred option. The public consultation section of the study, 'Options for Cycling Improvements in Vancouver', asks for responses to the four options presented and states, 'we are especially interested in your thoughts regarding the likelihood of success, the feasibility and the general appropriateness of the four options'. This wording gives the impression that resources are limited and the option that is most feasible at that time will be what is implemented with less delay - if this is the case the integration option is the most feasible because it requires little investment. When it comes down to a choice it is likely that cyclists are going to support the option that shows the most likelihood of implementation, because something is better than nothing. In this case, the integrated option would give cyclists who presently have no facilities at least something. 15 The Vancouver Transportation Plan, approved by council in 1997, gives priority to pedestrians, cycling, and transit. The basic directions for the plan were set by CityPlan (Vancouver's comprehensive plan), the G V R D ' s 1995 Livable Region Strategic Plan, and the region's 1994 transportation plan, Transport 2021. In regards to cycling, the intent of the city transportation plan is to expand cycling in the city as both local neighborhood and short distance commuter transportation, especially in the downtown. The bicycle policies in the transportation plan are to; • continue to develop bikeways, • provide a more complete bicycle network using painted bike lanes in areas where off-arterial bikeways are not possible (stated as top priority), • paint bike lanes on some arterial roads for fast direct and safe bike access across town, • raise the awareness of and visibility of cycling facilities by using pavement marking, • improve linkages with transit, and • encourage the provision of a high standard of bike facilities 2.4.2 Exis t ing Provinc ia l Policies The Ministry of Transportation and Highways issued its Interim Cycling Policy in 1992. The purpose of the policy was to officially recognize cycling as an efficient and healthy use of the provincial infrastructure. The policy generally states that cyclists wi l l be accommodated on all new or upgraded highways and cycling wi l l be considered at all stages in Ministry transportation projects, from design to construction and maintenance. The fundamental problem with the policy is that it has still not been officially adopted, but remains interim. 7 After 7 years, the Ministry is currently in the process of revising the policy with the intent of adoption. 6 For comparison, Portland, considered one of the best cycling cities in North America, has a 'Bikeway Network' consisting of a combination of bike lanes, bicycle boulevards (shared roadway where cyclists are given priority and traffic calming devices are used), off-street paths, and shared roadways (with no special treatment). 7 Cycling is a legally recognized vehicle under the Ministry of Transportation and Highways Act, Chapter 311, 1996 Revised Statutes of British Columbia. 16 2.5 P O L I C Y I N F L U E N C E S The factors that influence any policy process are intricate and complex. In United States policy-making the 'iron triangle' is one reference to the interaction and exchange between a small and exclusive set of actors from congress, administrative agencies, and lobbying groups (Freeman, 1965). These iron triangles have been the frustration of policy reformers and public advocacy groups who have had to fight to infiltrate the policy process and stop behind-closed-door dealings. The notions of policy communities (Heclo and Wildavsky, 1974), issue-specific networks (Heclo, 1978), policy networks (Kenis and Schneider, 1991), local decision-making networks (John and Cole, 1995), and advocacy coalitions (Sabatier, 1988) have been presented in policy literature, as alternatives to the iron-triangle model, to explain what influences, or what should influence, policy processes. This literature mainly speaks to policy-making on the national level and has focused on activities in the areas of energy, water, health and services, labor and agriculture. However, these concepts are applicable to local communities as well (Gardner, 1990). In its most basic sense, the term 'network' merely denotes, in a suggestive manner, the fact that policy making involves a large number and wide variety of public and private actors from the different levels and fundamental areas of government and society. (Hanf and Scharpf, 1977) Policy network theory stresses the interrelations and interdependence of individual actors and therefore draws attention to the patterns of linkages and interactions among the actors and the way in which those interactions structure the behavior of individual organizations (Hanf and Scharpf, 1977). Transportation policy has changed significantly over the last decade. B y looking at previous local and regional public consultation processes in transportation one can draw a general picture of the different interests who participate in, and therefore influence, transportation policy. Both the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority ( G V T A , now TransLink) and the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Highways (MoTH) provide examples. The TransLink Public Advisory Committee (PAC) has representatives from each municipality in the Greater Vancouver Regional District ( G V R D ) , transit, students, businesses, engineers, cyclists, trucking, Vancouver Board of Trade, Council of Shopping Centres, British Columbia Automobile Association ( B C A A ) , disabled, Environmental Law Association, the B C 17 Road Bui lding and Heavy Construction Association, and motorcyclists. The list of stakeholders contacted by M o T H for its interim cycling policy can be found in Appendix 5. The presence of bicycle advocacy groups 'at the table' during local and regional public consultation processes is one indicator that their past activities in the policy process has resulted in their increased influence, thereby, gaining them increased presence. Whi le bicycle advocacy groups form one arm of the local transportation policy 'subsystem' 8 the interest is not in examining all the actors in Vancouver's transportation policy coalition, but rather to better understand the functioning of bicycle advocacy by documenting and analyzing the mechanisms bicycle advocates use to affect local policy. 8 Subsystem refers to the network of interests who form coalitions to work together to affect policy around an issue important to them. (Ellison 1998) 18 CHAPTER 3 ADVOCACY THEORY 3.1 POLICY COMMUNITIES Organizations, viewed as distinct social forms, arouse sociological curiosity and stimulate attempts to study and understand them. Apart from academic interest, the fact that organizations are prominent, often dominant, forces in our lives is a compelling reason for trying to understand them. If human beings need to understand their environments to be able to survive, and even more, to live effective lives, they need to learn how organizations, which dominate these environments, work. (Jones 1996, 2) For the people planning for change in our transportation system, Jones' assertions extend to understanding how organizations affect change. Pross (1992) has developed the theory of policy communities to help explain the functions that groups perform in the political system. A policy community is that part of a political system that acquires a dominant voice in determining government decisions in a specific field of public activity. It is populated by governmental agencies, pressure groups, media people, and individuals who have interest in a particular policy field and attempt to influence it (Pross 1992, 119). In this case, the field of public activity is local transportation policy. According to Pross (1992), a policy community is made up of two parts, the sub-government and the attentive public. The sub-government is the policy-making body of each community and consists of government agencies and institutionalized interest groups. Participation in the sub-government requires that organizations have strong organizational capabilities and ability to devote time and resources to participation on advisory committees, policy review, and continual formal and informal access to agency officials. The attentive public includes those who are affected by, or interested in, the policies of specific agencies but who do not participate in policy-making on a regular basis (Pross 1992, 121). In this thesis Vancouver cycling advocacy groups wi l l be looked at from the perspective of policy communities. The Vancouver cycling community plays a part the sub-government, with members holding positions on the Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee ( B A C ) , participating on the G V T A Public Advisory Committee, and contributing to policy development and review. The Vancouver cycling community also is a part of the attentive public, with both the formal and the less formal groups and individuals keeping an eye on a broader range of activities that affect cyclists. 19 Although bicycle advocacy groups are only one part of the policy community that has influence over transportation policy, understanding their role, and extending this knowledge to understand how coalitions are built within the policy community to affect change could be helpful for planners, politicians, and advocates themselves. 3.2 A D V O C A C Y O R G A N I Z A T I O N S Problems of inequality abound in our society. In the case of transportation issues the distribution of power, money, and prestige goes to the automobile and oil industries, automobile services and infrastructure, and car owners. To balance the distribution of power and solve the problems resulting from the imbalance, people who are marginalized sometimes organize to gain more control over decision-making. A person acting alone may have little power however, when working with other people the ability to get things done increases. Therefore, the goal of organizing, generally, is to strengthen collective capacities to bring about social change (Staples 1984, 1). Advocacy, in general, is the process of presenting group interests in legislative, administrative, or other established institutional arenas (Checkoway, 1995). "It assumes that any group should have representation regardless of wealth and power and that some groups have substantial resources for representation, but others would benefit from advocacy." Advocates tend to be highly experienced, deeply committed, and anxious for change. Advocacy groups generally promote personal contacts with public officials, conduct investigative research, release findings to the media, and build coalitions with other groups to expand resources beyond the reach of any one group acting alone (Checkoway 1995, 11). The importance of the role of advocacy in decision-making has been studied and analyzed by Pross (1992) and Zander (1990). Pross argues that advocacy groups are essential to any modern state and that their ability to channel information to and from policy-makers is an advantage to society (1992, 2). Pross develops a general theory about advocacy groups' role in political systems (1992, 86). Zander discusses the more sophisticated methods used by advocates (as opposed to the pressuring and hostile acts that get media attention). However, Zander specifically states that he presents no theory (1990, xi i i ) . These authors show the link between group characteristics and effectiveness and influence over decision-making. Therefore, Pross' theory of the policy community (as described 20 in section 3.1) and model of group characteristics, supplemented by Zander's discussion of the properties and styles of community groups, are used as the framework for exploring what group characteristics occur in Vancouver cycling advocacy groups. This in turn, allows for discussion of the effectiveness of bicycle advocacy and comparison of group approaches and organizational structures to form the basis for the explanation of advocacy groups' influence on decision-makers and their role in the local decision-making process in Vancouver. 9 Pross (1992, 3) analyzes organizations whose members act together to influence public policy in order to promote a common interest and refers to these organizations as pressure groups. Pross builds a conceptual framework for understanding relationships between Canadian pressure groups and the political system. To do this he asks four basic questions: what are pressure groups, what do they do, why do they do it, and in what circumstances? These questions revolve around the central question, what roles do pressure groups play in the Canadian political system? This thesis asks how do they do what they do? Pross argues that all formal non-governmental associations active in a political community possess characteristics that give them policy significance. "These characteristics have two aspects: those that have political significance but have emerged in the organization as a result of its internal life without regard to policy considerations, and those that are explicitly developed as a result of the group's attempts to influence policy" (1992, 100). Pross calls the first aspect 'group characteristics' and the second the group's 'policy capacity'. Group characteristics represent the potential an organization can exploit to bring pressure to bear on the policy process. The policy capacity of an organization determines how effectively that base can be exploited. Pross identifies policy capacity as an important ingredient in determining the influence of any organization. Policy capacity tends to be associated with institutionalization; a process that invests the group with a system of values that affect the application of their characteristics to the policy process. Institutionalized groups tend to have their group characteristics and policy capacity most fully developed. The components of group characteristics and policy capacity as defined by Pross are summarized in Table 1. 9 In a study of pressure group politics Gardner (1990) uses Pross' theory of the policy community supplemented by 21 Table 1: G roup Characteristics and Policy Capacity (Source: Pross 1992,101) GROUP CHARACTERISTICS POLICY CAPACITY Membership Resources Devoted to Policy Activity • Absolute size • financial • Socio-economic status of individual • staff members • volunteer • Linkages • space Resources • experience • financial • standing with related groups • extent and source diversity (collaboration) • staff and voluntary support • status with government (consultation, • leadership positional politics, organizational • internal cohesion privileges) • track record and public reputation Structures Organizational Structure • internal differentiation • articulative capacity • participation in inter-group differentiation • coalitional capacity Outputs Outputs • information and articulation • communication • mobilization and lobbying • revenue related services • public responsibilities • mobilization related services Zander (1990, 55) identified the characteristics, or properties, of groups to include purpose, established procedures, style of leadership, methods of reaching decisions, quality of performance, the beneficiaries of its efforts, the motives of its members, intergroup alliances, kinds of connections among participants, and the group's products. These properties are those that the leaders and members think the organization needs in order to effectively use its chosen method of influencing target persons. Zander (1990, 56) discusses properties of groups, in general, as formal or informal. Formal groups are characterized by precisely defined procedures, are small bureaucracies and function is specified ways. Informal groups have loosely delineated characteristics which serve as rough guidelines, and are readily modified when that seems wise. Pross would call grassroots groups 'nascent' and bureaucratic groups 'institutionalized' (1992, 124). Formal groups are small bureaucracies which function in specified ways and characterized by precisely defined procedures. Informal groups have loosely delineated characteristics which serve as rough guidelines and are readily modified when that seems wise. observations on environmental politics from Lowe and Goyder as the foundation for interpreting the dynamics of the campaign to protect South Moresby Island. 22 Groups falling in between the two extremes are characterized by a mixture of qualities, formal in some respects and informal in others (Zander 1990, 56). 3.2.1 Approaches to Bicycle Advocacy Literature on grassroots advocacy and lobbying and bicycle advocacy handbooks take on a 'how to' approach, rather than a discussion of the types and differences in approach. 1 0 A useful starting point for a discussion specific to bicycle advocacy groups was found in Bicycle Transportation (Forester, 1984). Forester discusses various types of organizations (pro/anti car or bike), purposes (recreational to political), and agendas (cyclists vs. political). For this thesis a typology was built from Forester's categories, informed by the work of Pross and Zander and the terminology used by Vancouver bicycle advocates (see Table 2). As an addition to the genera] characteristics of advocacy organizations described by Pross and Zander, this typology, specific to bicycle advocacy, helps to inform the analysis of the effectiveness of local bicycle advocacy groups. 10 Roots to Power (Staples, 1984), Cascade Bicycle Club Government Affairs Committee Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Policy and Advocacy Handbook (Mozer, 1991), How to Lobby for Alternative Transportation (BEST, 1999), The Bicycle Advocate's Action Kit (Bicycle Federation of America, 1993) 23 Table 2: Classification of Approaches to Cyc l ing Advocacy AGENDA Anti Cycling • Insist presence of cyclists delays and endangers traffic Anti Car • View driving as an evil activity (this is the initial motivation for their activity) • May view cycling only as a means to address broader environmental issues Pro Cycling • Want cycling conditions improved specifically • Cycle for the pleasure of cycling PURPOSE Support • The traditional cycling club existed purely for sport and recreation • More recent organizations are focused on cycling as transportation Coordination • Permit coordination among local groups Lobbying • Seek broad policy changes affecting cycling • Seek a modal shift (want to make cycling better for everyone, not just people who already cycle) Direct Action • Draw attention to issues • Non-compromising APPROACHES 1 1 Radical • Action orientated, grassroots, working outside the system, motivated by emotion Mainstream • Bureaucratic, conservative, working inside the system, action based on feeling is viewed as likely to undermine performance Each of these descriptives together forms an overlapping continuum, rather than absolute distinct organization types. A useful representation of this continuum was developed by Vancouver cycling activist Scott Nelson (see Figure 2). The comparative distinction of radical and mainstream derived from discussion in Jones (1996, 18) of Weber's description of the impersonal characteristic of a bureaucratic organization where 'presumably, Weber regarded actions based on feelings as the opposite of rational action, and therefore likely to undermine bureaucratic performance.' 24 Figure 2: Vancouver Bicycle Advocacy Tactics and Positions Source: Scott Nelson (1999) PNC Bicycle People Adbusters Critical Mass DAFF Cai SPEC BSWG BEST DCN GVCC B C C C VACC Working 'within ttie s; (Lower Mifeilnd, 1999) Note: Figure includes Adbusters and SPEC, as they appeared in Nelson's original, however these groups are not discussed in this thesis. Table 3: Classification of Vancouver Cyc l ing Groups GROUP AGENDA PURPOSE APPROACH BICYCLE PEOPLE 1989 • Pro-Cycling • Anti-Car • Direct-Action • Radical BEST 1991 • Pro-Cycling • Lobbying • Mainstream CYCLING BC • Pro-Cycling • Support • Mainstream BCCC 1998 • Pro-Cycling • Coordination • Lobbying • Mainstream VACC 1997 • Pro-Cycling • Lobbying • Mainstream BSWG 1997 • Pro-Cycling • Direct-Action • Toward Radical BIKE CO-OP 1998 • Pro-Cycling • Support • Lobbying • Mainstream PNC • Anti-Car • Direct-Action • Radical DAFF 1998 • Pro-Cycling • Anti-Car • Direct-Action • Radical CRITICAL MASS early 1990 • Pro-Cycling • Direct-Action • Radical 25 C H A P T E R 4 C A S E S T U D Y The City of Vancouver boasts a relatively dense and compact urban landscape. The climate, although rainy, is mild. The city has placed cycling as a priority in its transportation policy and has had a cycling policy in place for more than ten years. These are the types of characteristics that comprise an environment conducive to cycling. Although Vancouver has an extensive bikeway system, 1 2 it has been widely criticized by the cycling community for moving slowly in the implementation of its cycling policy. Over the last 2 to 3 years the number of bicycle advocacy groups focused on cycling issues in Vancouver has more than tripled, from 2 to 7. These factors combined create an interesting case study. What has caused the increase in the number of advocacy groups? What are these groups doing? How are they working to move the city ahead in the implementation of its progressive transportation and cycling policies? What is the story of these advocacy groups and how are they related? 4.1 C Y C L I N G A D V O C A C Y I N V A N C O U V E R Mah (1995, 22) writes in his thesis on bicycle transportation policy in Vancouver that much of the impetus for encouraging bicycle use in transportation planning has come from groups and organizations involved in bicycling advocacy. M a h also makes the following criticisms of these advocacy groups; • their efforts may only have a limited effect on encouraging casual cyclists to use their bicycles for transportation purposes, and • these groups have not addressed the potential for bringing about changes in land use strategies. Mah further suggests in order to achieve anything more than a token increase in bicycle ridership there needs to be a commitment to a more comprehensive approach to regional transportation. While these observations are valid, they lead to questions regarding what the goals and motives of local cycling advocacy groups actually are and how they fit into the overall transportation process. 26 At the time of Mah's analysis there were only two cycling advocacy groups organized in Vancouver - B E S T and Bicycle People (with Cycl ing B C working regionally and provincially). Since than several more groups have formed and have become active lobbyists for cycling transportation. Other significant changes have occurred as well , including the shift of focus at B E S T from cycling to alternative transportation in general and the formation of TransLink, the regional transportation authority. If cycling advocacy groups have been the impetus for encouraging cycling transportation planning in Vancouver, then what are their underlying mechanisms of organization, what approaches do they use to influence policy, and how do they fit into the transportation planning process? 4.2 HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF BICYCLE ADVOCACY IN VANCOUVER Prior to 1988, Cycl ing B C advocated on behalf of Vancouver cyclists. Although, primarily a group focused on promoting and organizing competitive cycling events, Cycl ing B C also works on transportation issues. Cycl ing B C gained status at various levels of government as the official representative of cyclists in the Vancouver region with its advocacy committee reviewing and evaluating policies and programs implemented by municipal governments (Mah 1995, 24). Cycl ing B C was instrumental in generating many early changes for cyclists, especially at the regional and provincial levels (Stary, pc 1999). These changes include bike racks on buses through the Massey tunnel, access to Seabus, dropping the extra fare for bicycles on transit, and amending parts of the Motor Vehicle Act ( M V A ) pertaining to cycling. Over the last five years financial problems reduced Cycl ing B C ' s advocacy activities (Stary, pc 1999). The organized cycling movement focused on cycling in Vancouver began in 1988/89. According to Guy Wera of Bicycle People (pc 1999) the roots of the movement are in the radical antics of a group of friends, calling themselves the Bicycle People, who rallied in protest of air pollution, dominance of the car, and lack of safe cycling facilities. After a few organized protest rides throughout the city, the Bicycle People decided they needed to raise some funds and register as a non-profit organization. In 1991, they registered under the name Better 1 2 A system of traffic calmed streets with bike signage and signaling that favors cyclists adjacent to the automobile arterials. 27 Environmentally Sound Transportation (BEST) after learning they could not register a name containing the word 'people'. Hence, B E S T became the legitimate fund raising organization for Bicycle People and Bicycle People was able to continue its radical protesting and lobbying (Wera, pc 1999). Whi le Bicycle People continued to draw attention to cycl ing issues through group rides and confrontational street theater, B E S T worked to further the cycl ing cause in Vancouver using a more conservative approach. Eventually, a rift formed within the two branches and the Board of Directors of B E S T decided to stop funding the activities of Bicycle People. Now the two organizations are entirely separate entities. The B C Cycl ing Coalition ( B C C C ) was born out of the desire to form an umbrella organization for cycling coalitions across the Province in order to effectively lobby for cycling transportation at the provincial level. Their mandate also includes helping others to form new coalitions modeled after the successful Greater Victoria Cycl ing Coalit ion ( G V C C ) . B C C C ' s initial efforts began in June 1997 at an Advocacy Workshop in Victoria and in November 1997 the idea of a provincial cycling coalition became a reality. The purpose of the B C C C is to represent the interests of cyclists provincially and to secure their recognition in policy and programs affecting transportational cycling. Meanwhile, in order to address issues on a regional level, advocates from Cycl ing B C , B E S T , and the Vancouver Bicycle Club ( V B C ) 1 3 came together to form a regional coalition, Vancouver Area Cycl ing Coalition ( V A C C ) . The purpose of V A C C is to provide a single representative body for the Lower Mainland to communicate cyclists' transportation interests to the provincial and municipal governments. V A C C represents the basic need for sustainable urban transportation, with cycling as the main agenda. As these provincially and regionally focused groups formed and began lobbying for broader cycling issues, other groups formed to focus on Vancouver-specific issues. The Downtown Cyclists Network (DCN) formed in the fall of 1997 with the purpose of encouraging the Vancouver City Counci l to expand cycling planning efforts to the downtown core. The D C N exists to offer council a clear, unified message about the kind of improvements cyclists want downtown. The Burrard Street Working Group (BSWG) formed in 1997 to focus on the installation of bike lanes along the Burrard Street corridor (see Figure 3). B S W G began as a 1 3 The VBC is a recreational cycling group who are not directly involved in advocacy. 2 8 committee of B E S T . The original members decided to break away from B E S T once it was clear to them that funding was not going to be allocated for their specific advocacy efforts and formed B S W G . Figure 3: M a j o r Downtown Streets, including B u r r a r d Street 16THAVE While all of these efforts were being made to improve cycling conditions on the provincial, regional and municipal levels, the University Endowment Lands ( U E L ) , an unincorporated area of the Greater Vancouver Regional District ( G V R D ) next to the city of Vancouver and home of the University of British Columbia ( U B C ) , was in need of attention (see Figure 4). U B C is the second largest commuter destination in the region (second only to downtown), but did not have a transportation planner until 1997. To complicate matters, all roads leading to the University are under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation and Highways (MoTH) . The Bike Co-op formed in June 1998 to focus on the needs of cyclists in the U B C community. Formed with a founding grant from the U B C T R E K Centre (a new office at U B C dedicated to promoting a more sustainable environment through transportation) and assistance from Our Community Bikes (a project of B E S T ) , the Bike Co-op began to put together a fleet of community bikes, a bike repair facility, and lobby for improved cycling facilities to campus. 29 Figure 4: The University Endowment Lands and the Ci ty of Vancouver Critical Mass is an international movement that started in San Francisco in 1992 as a way to bring cyclists together in a "festive re-claiming of public space" (San Francisco Critical Mass web site). In cities throughout North America, cyclists gather for monthly rides (Critical Mass rides) which can take on various forms, from protest to celebration. In Critical Mass organizational politics have been replaced with a more decentralized system where ideas are spread through word of mouth and the distribution of flyers. The mission is defined differently by participants in different cities. The monthly Critical Mass rides in Vancouver evolved from rides organized by Bicycle People and individual action-oriented cyclists in the early 1990s. Critical Mass rides in Vancouver are non-confrontational. Special rides are periodically organized to bring attention to specific issues, such as the condition of cycling facilities on the Burrard Street and Lion 's Gate Bridges (see Figure 5). Politics within the cycling community stalled the momentum somewhat, but momentum is picking up once again (Adams, pc 1999). At present, monthly rides in Vancouver tend to be small, with 30-40 people. Flyer distribution and other promotional efforts are spearheaded by one local activist, who also maintains a Vancouver Critical Mass web site as a chronicle of monthly rides. 30 Figure 5: Cr i t i ca l Mass Ride L ion ' s Gate Br idge June 27,1999 Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuel (DAFF) is, essentially, a group of cyclists who ride around on their bikes wearing Dinosaur costumes. The idea was Lee Henderson's, a Vancouver bike commuter and advocate. Henderson made his first dinosaur mask purely for artistic purposes in the mid 1980s. B y the late 1980s, he had made a complete dinosaur costume out of paper. In the early 1990s, he began to make costumes out of corrugated plastic. The costumes were worn mostly at Halloween parties, until 1997 when Henderson wore one on an organized ride over the Burrard Street Bridge. Other cyclists recognized and appreciated the significance the combination of Henderson's dinosaur costume and bike had for communicating the problems associated with car dependence. Since then, many members of the cycling community have created their own dinosaur costumes and wear them on rides and to events across the city. The dinosaur costumes offer a creative and whimsical outlet for advocates, yet also carry a very poignant, non-verbal message (see Figure 6). Figure 6: Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels Figure 7: B i l l b o a r d Doctoring, P N C 31 People Not Cars, although not a cycling organization per se, ought to be mentioned in an account of cycling advocacy in Vancouver. " P N C is anyone who has had it with waiting for someone else to create their transportation Utopia for them. Anyone who wants to can call themselves P N C . There is no board, no structure to this group. P N C is an anti-organization. P N C is about empowering you to do it yourself: paint a bike lane, doctor a car ad billboard, hang a banner... whatever you are comfortable doing" (PNC web site). Essentially, People Not Cars exists to encourage people to push the envelope and take action against the car culture (see Figure 7). 4.3 B I C Y C L E A D V O C A C Y G R O U P S Eight people were interviewed from the following area advocacy groups; Bicycle People, B E S T , Cycl ing B C , B C C C , V A C C , B S W G , A M S Bike Co-op, and Critical Mass. Although a person involved with Critical Mass was interviewed, the group is not discussed in the analysis because it represents more of a movement than an advocacy or lobbying group. Critical Mass is discussed in the overview of the history of Vancouver bicycle advocacy (section 4.2). In this section the goals, approach, and organizational structure of each of the groups interviewed is summarized. This information is compiled from the interview transcripts, as well as from information provided by the groups on their respective web sites (see bibliography for a list of group web sites). 4.3.1 Bicycle People Bicycle People originally organized to provide a tool for fast change for bicycles and safe cycling. The goals of the group change as the members discover new things. Campaigns have included bike lanes on the Burrard Street Bridge, car-free Sundays, car-free Burrard Street, car-free University Boulevard, and most recently, wind tunnels - covered bike ways with wind blown through to help propel cyclists. Bicycle People's approach is through street theater, protest rides, media, and participation in discussions on radio shows. "We are getting away from doing street theater that alters traffic. I am getting into peaceful, nice, fun street theater. I think we can pass the message along better by having fun than by being rude. I like to empower more people to come out on our actions. If 32 we do things that are fun, then people wi l l bring their kids and people who would normally not come wi l l . I 'd like to see a harder message but a softer medium" (Wera, pc 1999). The group is volunteer run, mainly by one person. Funds are provided through donations. As issues arise and the need for action determined, other friends and members are contacted to help. Bicycle People, along with Critical Mass, Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels, and People Not Cars, is a group that is characterized by grassroots methods of organizational structure. 4.3.2 Better Environmental ly Sound Transportat ion ( B E S T ) B E S T ' s broad mandate is 'to promote the use of sustainable and appropriate forms of transportation in order to foster a higher quality of life for all British Columbians'. They promote a vision of communities where it is safe and convenient to walk, cycle, or take transit, and where planning is based on people rather than cars. B E S T is planning on going through a strategic planning process to identify what their specific goals should be. Generally, the approach taken by B E S T is through lobbying and promotional and educational campaigns. For cycling promotion specifically, B E S T coordinates the annual Bike Week (formally Bike to Work Week) in Vancouver. "Our strategies [for Bike Week] have changed from just doing events that get people interested, to more media and communications work. Our intent is to get the bicycling message out to the general public so it becomes more mainstream rather than alternative. Our reason for being mainstream is that i f you continue to be radical you are only going to appeal to the people who are radical and already committed and converted. The majority of people are not; we want to convert the masses" (Ho, pc 1999). Staff at B E S T write some method of evaluation - concrete measurables - into every project they do. To evaluate Bike Week they consider the demand for brochures, posters, and other products, number of media hits, number of organizations that join the commuter challenge, and the number of phone calls and volunteers. B E S T works with other non-governmental and community groups to raise awareness of urgent transportation issues, and to affect changes at the political level. B E S T is increasingly asked for their position on issues as the N G O voice on transportation issues. In 1998, BEST 'S two main advocacy and educational efforts centered around facilities for cyclists and pedestrians on the Lions Gate Bridge and the SkyTrain Extension Review process. 33 From the time B E S T started up to the time an executive director was hired, the organizational structure was fairly loose. The board of directors was a very active board - the people on the board were the most active people in the organization and they did the majority of work. When the board hired staff they had to shift over power and control to them. "There was a lot of resistance at first to hiring an executive director because it would change our flat structure to some what of a hierarchy" (Ho, pc 1999). At present B E S T has a staff of 7 employees, a budget of $400,000, and a membership of approximately 500. Funding for B E S T is from contracts and consulting, government and foundation grants, corporate funding, donations, and memberships. 4.3.3 Cyc l i ng B C The goal of Cycl ing B C is to encourage and enhance opportunities for cycling in the areas of competition, recreation, and transportation. They advocate cyclists' rights at the provincial level and provide resources to local bicycle activists. Cycl ing B C also promotes cycling to the public and co-ordinates different bicycle education courses. Cycl ing B C monitors developments that affect cyclists throughout the province, and represents the interests of cyclists to the media and to decision-makers. Wherever possible Cycl ing B C works co-operatively with other community groups, agencies, and organizations (public, private, and professional) which have similar objectives and which contribute to their aims. The organization also provides members with services, such as insurance, a library, and a monthly newsletter. Cycl ing B C is funded largely by membership dues, but also receive various government grants, program fees, donations, and sponsorships. Cycl ing B C has an office with 6 full and part-time staff. However, the organization relies heavily on the work of volunteers. Cycl ing B C has about 2,220 paid members (individual members) and approximately 500-600 club members and associates. Generally, the approach taken by Cycl ing B C in affecting transportation policy is through making contacts with people in positions of authority within agencies. "It seemed most effective to shoot for the top, get an audience, and make a case [for cycling] at that level. That then provided legitimacy in the eyes of the s taff (Stary, pc 1999). 34 Cycl ing B C has been instrumental in generating many changes at the regional and provincial levels including; bike racks on buses through the Massy Tunnel, bicycle access on the Seabus, and amendment of parts of the Motor Vehicle Act. 4.3.4 B r i t i sh Co lumbia Cyc l ing Coal i t ion ( B C C C ) The basic operating principle of B C C C is that the bicycle is a legitimate vehicle and should be an integral part of the transportation system. To promote the use of the bicycle as transportation and ensure its recognition in legislation and policy B C C C adopted the following goals; • integrate cycling into the transportation network and secure public investments in on-road and off-road infrastructure proportionate to its potential, 1 4 • instigate a provincial role in promoting cycling consistent with its health, recreation, economic and environmental benefits, • raise the profile of cycling with government and improve its image and status with the public, • pursue cycl ing safety through education, • support the development of local cycling coalitions and other cycl ing bodies to secure improved conditions for cyclists, • promote cooperation, safety and respect among all road users, and • encourage more people to ride bicycles more often. The approach of the B C C C is through direct contact with Provincial decision-makers. They meet once every three months with the Minister of Transportation and Highways. " Y o u start at the top and then use that name to work your way down" (van Loon, pc 1999). At present the B C C C has active committees and workgroups dealing with the following issues; Motor Vehicle Driver Training Manuals, revision of the Motor Vehicle Act , revision and adoption of the Interim Cycl ing Pol icy, creation of an Advocacy Pol icy Handbook, maintenance standards on Provincial Highways, and improving cycling access to the Lion's Gate and Port Mann Bridges in Vancouver. B C C C is volunteer run with a volunteer board of directors. Membership dues are the sole financial resource for the organization. This is a departure from standard engineering practice; typically demand has to be proven before facilities for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit are built, whereas roads are built often preceding demand, usually in anticipation of future demand. 35 4.3.5 Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition (VACC) The basic goal of V A C C is to enable more people to cycle more often. V A C C is pro-bicycle (not anti-car) and they support a variety of styles and approaches to cycling. V A C C works to institutionalize change through policy and legislation, aspires to consensus decision-making, and advocates better conditions for cyclists. While V A C C encourages cycling as a means of transportation, the organization respects those who choose or need to use other forms of transportation. The basic approaches used by V A C C to meet their goals are through lobbying, communication, and educational efforts. "Our methods tend not to be confrontational" (Campbell, pc 1999). They meet with government officials, produce and distribute a quarterly newsletter, encourage people to write letters to officials and attend public meetings, and organize rides for educational purposes and to draw media attention to issues. Although V A C C recognizes the importance of educational efforts, to date the group has focused on lobbying for improved facilities. Since 1997 the activities of the V A C C have contributed to the following; • a commitment from the provincial government to widen sidewalks throughout the Lions Gate and Stanley Park causeway, • adoption of a bicycle program by TransLink, with a budget of $780,000 in its first year, • changes to the Burnaby Official Community Plan, including 'reserving right-of-way for cyclists', and • hosting the first annual meeting of municipal bicycle advisory committees from across the G V R D . V A C C is a volunteer run organization, with a board of directors who are the organization's most active members. V A C C is financed by memberships, donations, and proceeds from special events (during Bike Week 1999, V A C C sponsored its first Bike F i l m Night to raise money for the organization). One of the organization's mandates is to maintain their independence by avoiding any funding or support that might compromise their ability to speak out, lead, or criticize. 4.3.6 Burrard Street Working Group (BSWG) The goal of the B S W G is very specific; to get bike lanes on both sides of Burrard Street, from 16th Avenue across the Burrard Street Bridge to Pacific Boulevard (see Figure 3 for context map). Bike lanes on Burrard Street have already been recognized by the city as a priority 36 in its cycling agenda. However, the city, through a series of events, has delayed making a budgetary commitment. B S W G is pushing the city to make this commitment. B S W G ' s approach is through direct-action and is outlined by a strategic plan to research the issue, come up with designs, conduct a public education campaign, and then lobby the city. Although B S W G is an action-based group they have dedicated most of their time initially into researching the problem and developing well designed and well thought out solutions to present to the city. B S W G is a committed group of concerned citizens who came together from other local advocacy groups to focus on this one issue. The group is volunteer based and has established a two year time frame in which to work on getting bike lanes on Burrard Street. A l l the funds and resources needed for research and design have been donated by the group's participants. 4.3.7 AMS Bike Co-op The goals of the Bike Co-op are to provide public bikes for the University of British Columbia ( U B C ) community, provide mechanic training and shop facilities for Co-op members, provide commercial bike repair services for the University community, and advocate for cycling issues and safety improvements to campus bike routes. The approach taken by the Co-op has been to talk to various people working on projects throughout campus and, when needed, apply pressure through letter writing and accessing the support network of the broader city-wide cycling community. " A year ago we had a mess of goals and we have grossly exceeded all of them, more or less. I think the things we are doing is making campus a fair bit better for bikes - there is now two shops, and bikes for people to play with, and cheap bikes for sale, and bike mechanic training. So I guess we call ourselves effective because we are doing what we set out to do" (Buehler, pc 1999). The Co-op has also been involved in advocacy efforts that have led to bike lanes being painted on 16th Avenue and the redesign of University Boulevard, which sets a precedent in Vancouver by taking a lane from cars in order to create a bike lane (see Figure 4 for context map). The Co-op began as a volunteer run organization with a board of directors. In the summer of 1999 the organization hired a team of students to produce a campus cycling map, 37 design a campus Greenway, and create a campus cycling education center. The organization receives funding from membership dues, proceeds from its bike shop, from various campus departments, and from federal and provincial grants. 4.4 B I C Y C L E ADVISORY C O M M I T T E E (BAC) The former chair of the Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee, John Whistler (chair 1990-1996), was interviewed for this thesis in order to obtain a historical perspective of the committee. Whistler is currently on the Board of Directors of B E S T . The Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee started in the early 1980s as an informal committee. There were a number of cycling advocates who pushed the committee onto City staff because they wanted to get cycling issues addressed. Over time the Engineering Department, the department within the city that is the primary mover behind the B A C , began to understand the value the committee brought to the planning process. Eventually the committee was brought to council where it became a formal committee in the late 1980s. Every new council determines which committees they are going to have and then make appointments to those committees. Staff has recommended to the last two councils to continue with the B A C . The committee typically has 11 members; 4 members are appointed by city council, 3 by the park board, 3 by the school board, and 1 by Cycl ing B C (Vancouver City Clerk's office, pc 1999). To fi l l its appointments to the committee the city wi l l advertise the vacancies in the newspaper and accept resumes (Whistler, pc 1999). In general, the appointees have a cycling background, as is currently the case, although this is not guaranteed. The committee meets once a month. As cycling issues come up, the committee makes recommendations to council on what they believed should be the course of action. According to Whistler, development permit applications for major projects typically are what drives which issues are addressed by the Committee. Engineering brings forward plans and the committee advises engineering on what they think of the plans. The committee has the latitude to bring up issues outside of what engineering brings forward and send a motion to council. The role of the committee is to advise council on bicycle issues. Although a careful distinction was made Whistler between the committee functioning in an advisory rather than an advocacy role, this distinction is not completely clear. For example, the Bike Network subcommittee of the B A C was responsible for securing the approval of the bikeway system in 38 Vancouver, the most tangible bike facilities build in the city so far. Furthermore, the present committee has 7 members who are associated with area cycling advocacy groups, including Cycling B C and V A C C (Vancouver City Clerk's office, pc 1999) and as stated by Katherine McCune of M o T H , "most municipalities now have a bicycle advisory committee who deal with the advocacy groups, a lot of [issues] come up to us through [bicycle advisory committees] rather than directly [from advocacy groups]". Although most of the issues brought to the committee tend to be driven by engineering and planning, the committee meetings are open to the public. Issues that advocacy groups have wi l l get filtered to the B A C . If issues are not being addressed by the staff, the committee tends to bring them up. St i l l , the general process of bringing up issues is internally driven by staff within the city. Advocacy groups are listened to but they do not set the agenda of the committee (Whistler, pc 1999). 39 C H A P T E R 5 ANALYSIS In order to analyze the information obtained through the key informant interviews the following categories were used; goals, approach, organizational structure, communication, networking, effectiveness, and barriers. The goals, approach, and organizational structure of the groups interviewed have been introduced in Chapter 4. In this chapter, the goals, approaches, and organizational structures are compared and the findings relating to each of the additional categories; communication, networking, effectiveness, and barriers. Together these categories are analyzed to help identify the common factors that contribute or inhibit the advocacy groups' effectiveness and their influence on decision-makers in cycling policy. To provide further insight into how bicycle advocacy groups get their interests translated into policy the following areas are also discussed based on the findings from the interviews; • the process of cycling transportation policy development and implementation in Vancouver, • the role of the municipality, region, and province in bicycle policy and planning, • the role of bicycle advocacy in the decision-making process, and • the elements that constitute good planning for cyclists. 5.1 G R O U P G O A L S The goals of Vancouver area cycling groups are generally to promote and enhance bicycle transportation and encourage people to cycle more often. B E S T , essentially the first formally organized cycling advocacy group in Vancouver, has changed its goal from advocating for cycling issues to the broader mandate of promoting sustainable forms of transportation. B E S T has begun to f i l l the gap in cycling education and promotion, however this shift, combined with Cycl ing B C ' s reduction in transportation advocacy efforts, left a substantial gap in lobbying activities geared specifically at improving conditions for cyclists. The existence of this gap, widening over the last 3 to 5 years, helps explain the emergence of new cycling advocacy groups in the last 3 years. V A C C , D C N , B S W G and B C C C have all formed as a response to this gap. This sequence of events appears to be typical in policy communities; "to meet the primary demands of members many groups ration the energies they devote to policy causes. Their role in policy formation is consequently diminished and that of groups single-mindedly concerned with 40 policy issues is enhanced" (Pross 1992, 15). In this case, Cycl ing B C curtailed its limited lobbying to focus on the recreational and competitive needs of its members and B E S T changed focus to broader transportation issues. This allowed groups focusing on cycling transportation issues to step-up their role in policy formation. B E S T , formally focused on Vancouver, became more regionally oriented. V A C C became a new group focused on regional issues. D C N and B S W G filled the Vancouver-focused gap left by B E S T . B C C C focused on the coordination and consolidation of the cycling lobbying efforts Provincially, thereby filling in the gap left by Cycl ing B C . The emergence of B C C C also enabled local groups to focus more time and energy on municipal and regional policies. 5.2 APPROACH Vancouver cycling advocacy groups form two broad categories of approaches, grassroots and bureaucratic. The grassroots model is based on informal interactions and structures and may be associated with characteristics such as intuition, action-oriented, and consensus-based. Bicycle People, D A F F , and Critical Mass represent these types of groups. The bureaucratic model refers to an ostensibly more rational and logical process, with features such as authority and hierarchy, technical experience, division of labor, and rules (Jones 1996, 19). B E S T and Cycl ing B C fit this model in the most ways. Other groups such as V A C C , B C C C and B S W G have characteristics of both approaches. Based on the history of bicycle advocacy in Vancouver it can be argued that most advocacy organizations start out in the grassroots form and evolve into a more bureaucratic structure. The literature also seems to emphasize this evolution, however there are several groups in Vancouver who, even as they mature, would rather maintain a more grassroots structure than become more bureaucratic. Although the roots of Vancouver bicycle advocacy are in action-based, conscience-raising protests, the approach most widely used by bicycle advocates now is that of more reserved and strategic lobbying. B E S T , V A C C , B C C C , Cycling B C , the Bike Co-op, and B S W G all use components of this approach. In the opinion of both advocacy groups and decision-makers, the approach that is perceived to be the most effective in obtaining cycling advocacy goals is the more reserved, but 41 persistent, lobbying approach. According to Doug Louie, an effective group is one which pushes "the limits for their cause, but does not go out on a limb and destroy everyone's efforts." "Our intent is to get the bicycling message out in the general public so it becomes more mainstream rather than an alternative. I think this is the one difference between B E S T ' s strategy and some of the other more radical cyclists, they wi l l never appeal to the mainstream. If you continue to be radical you are only going to appeal to the people who are radical and already committed, and the majority of people are not. We want to convert the masses" (Ho, pc 1999). Interestingly, the more radical, action-based approach is widely recognized by both advocates and decision-makers as important to the efforts of the cycling movement as a whole (this was discussed in all but 3 of the 13 interviews conducted). The radical advocates are constantly pushing the boundaries of the debate, therefore the middle ground shifts and expands to encompass a broader range of issues. "[More radical advocates] are sometimes useful just to frame things. You 've got those people over there, and then there's these people over here, and you aim for the broad middle" (Price, pc 1999). This allows the more conservative groups to seem more reasonable in their demands and even allows them to expand the perimeters of what they lobby for to include what may have, in the recent past, seemed too radical. "There is a definite need for people to be radical, for one it makes [BEST] look more mainstream and people wi l l listen to us more because we [don't appear] radical" (Ho, pc 1999). The radical advocates themselves recognize varying approaches. In regard to groups who use a more conservative approach, Guy Wera states, "they're doing a good thing, they're doing something their way." 5.3 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The organizational structure of cycling advocacy groups in this study ranges from loose, spontaneous, and organic with a reliance on volunteer work and support, to a more hierarchical structure with an executive director and staff support. There are three general levels of organization. The first is exemplified by the hierarchical structure of B E S T and Cycl ing B C where there is a board of directors, an executive director, staff, and membership. The second is exemplified by the flat structure of V A C C , B C C C , and D C N where the organization is all volunteer run and the board of directors are the most active members. The third is exemplified 42 by the grassroots structure of B S W G and Bicycle People (this would also include Crit ical Mass and D A F F ) where there is no formal structure. How to structure an organization is a decision considered carefully by cycling organizations in Vancouver. "I don't want [the Bike Co-op] to become a normal N G O [non-government organization] with a disenfranchised membership, a bunch of fat cat employees, and it just existing for it 's own benefit. I'm open to ideas as to how to set up some sort of a long term organizational management - it's a really interesting question" (Buehler, pc 1999). The executive director of B E S T recognized the benefit of keeping an organization non-hierarchical while discussing some of the newer bicycle advocacy groups. "It is really good because [other groups] are much more free to say whatever they want to say because they don't have anyone they are responsible to. They can be much more radical than we are. It's not because we get government funding that limits what we say necessarily; it 's just that we have to be quite respectable and mainstream in order for [government] to give us credibility." The president of B C C C describes the advantages of being a volunteer-based organization funded solely by memberships. "It makes you stronger because the only reports you have to give are to your membership. You' re not dependent on anybody else. Y o u can't bite the hand that feeds you. A staff person [provides] continuity and the office [location] doesn't change. But it requires fundraising, are you then going to have to have the staff person fundraise as wel l?" There are trade-offs associated with types of organizational structure. V A C C has thought about having a staff person for continuity sake, someone who is always around for people to contact. However, the organization would have to increase the membership base and do a lot of fundraising to make that happen. Then, once a staff person is on board V A C C would need to insure there is enough cash flow, which means more time spent on fundraising. "It could be a problem, but there is a balance" (Campbell, pc 1999). Scott Nelson of B S W G also discussed these types of trade-offs. " A lot of us who are involved with B S W G are very action oriented. Part of what we didn't l ike about B E S T was [the board] wanting to impose layers of bureaucracy and structure, we just wanted to get stuff done. We saw that if you don't say, 'okay this is a single issue group and we know when we're done and the group can end', then you risk getting into this cycle where we have to have an office, then you have to hire staff, and you have to hire fundraisers. We didn't want that. We just 4 3 wanted to have a group that focuses on a single issue, on a single area in town and then we would know when we had done our work. In that way it is very much a grassroots group." Guy Wera compares B E S T and Bicycle People, the two organizations that once functioned essentially as one, but that now represent the two ends of the advocacy spectrum. " B E S T has become really conservative and now they are getting a lot of money because they are conservative. I feel they are not doing as much as they could, but they're doing a good thing. They're doing something their way. I think personally, it is not efficient, not radical enough. What we originally created [in B E S T ] was a tool for fast change - there were no ifs, ands, or buts. We wanted bicycles and safe cycling. But I 'm realizing there were just a few of us that were like that and everyone else was more on the conservative side." Wera's comparison also illustrates the close relationship between structure, approach, and effectiveness, which is discussed in section 6.1. The composition of a group's Board of Directors came up as an important organizational factor to both volunteer-based groups and organizations with staff as well . "The board is usually the most effective part of a volunteer organization and they all do something. Usually the Board are the people who volunteer the most or come out as being really keen on one particular topic and they get asked to be on the board because they show themselves as being very interested, having a passion for it. They are far more involved with the organization then they would be i f they only come together once a month to listen to what the Executive Director has to say and then rubber stamp it" (van Loon, pc 1999). "Our board of directors has changed quite a lot. They're way more hands-off; they are supposed to look at the bigger picture. What I 'd like our board to do eventually is look at more strategic planning and fundraising. Board development is a big thing for me" (Ho, pc 1999). 5.4 EFFECTIVENESS The advocacy groups interviewed were asked how they measure, or tell, whether they had been effective. Decision-makers were asked which groups, in their opinion, are most effective and why. Groups discussed effectiveness in terms of meeting their goals, whereas the decision-makers discussed their perception of groups' effectiveness. 44 5.4.1 Effectiveness As Discussed By Groups It is difficult to measure, or objectively assess, the actual extent of any one group's effectiveness. The most straight forward way, as expressed in the interviews, is to simply look at the groups' established goals and then look at what has been happening around those goals. The increase in the number of advocacy groups and the strengthening of their networking and coordination contributes to the difficulty of attributing any particular change in policy or practice to one group. To gauge their progress, most groups look at what policy changes have occurred, the type and amount of cycling infrastructure in place, the type of reception they get from the public and authorities, etc. Regardless of the organizational structure of the group or its approach, each group felt it was effective at least somewhat in achieving its goals. "It is very hard to tell i f the group's activities are effective, it is dependant on the long run. I know that what I was saying in 1990, 1991, 1992 is now starting to come through" (Wera, pc 1999). For the B C C C the goal posts of success are having many more coalitions around the Province who join the B C C C for provincial lobbying, having more say early in the provincial decision-making process, having planning for cyclists more institutionalized in the work of Ministry staff, and having a Provincial Bicycle Advisory Committee. However, because the group is only a year old, it is difficult to assess their effectiveness, especially since they work on the provincial level where the transportation planning process tends to be slower and more bureaucratic. Richard Campbell, V A C C president, states it is hard to judge how much impact V A C C has had because there are other groups and individuals also pushing for what they are doing. "With the Lions Gate Bridge, the Minister has acknowledged us in statements. When the formation of the G V T A [now TransLink] was announced, cycling wasn't even mentioned at all. In the first year of our lobbying, and the lobbying of other groups, [the G V T A ] at least have a bicycle program in place with a budget of over $700,000, have committed to bike racks on all the buses by the year 2005, and are talking about actually allocating funds to improve the B C Parkway. These are all things that we have been pushing for" (Campbell, pc 1999). The only measure of effectiveness for B S W G is how far the city moves toward getting bike lanes on Burrard Street. "Given that we have a two year mandate and the original intention was to see the bike lanes on Burrard within two years, obviously we're not going to reach that. Certainly that says something about our effectiveness, and the political climate, and the state of 45 mind of engineering" (Nelson, pc 1999). As this points out, a group's effectiveness is also dependent on many external forces. 5.4.2 Effectiveness As Discussed By Decision-Makers Pross (1992, 93) states, "it is extremely difficult to determine how influential [individual] groups are." A s one interviewee observed, "each group has its own mandate, focus, and audience, thus comparisons of their effectiveness are not possible" (Kuo, pc 1999). According to Pross, it is the perceptions of a group's influence that affect how individual groups are treated by media, officials, politicians, the public, and other groups. In this thesis this is extended to also include how effective decision-makers perceive groups to be. Vancouver area decision-makers tended to identify effectiveness with a group's experience and whether the group is; 1) representative of other cyclists and a broad range of opinion, 2) well researched, professional, sophisticated, persistent, rational, thoughtful, and respectful, and 3) has a sense of appropriate timing, support from the cycling community, and respect from community, staff, and council. This is a broad list of characteristics but a list that most cycling advocates groups in Vancouver have and utilize, particularly B E S T , V A C C , B S W G , and B C C C as discussed in section 4.3. According to Katherine McCune, effective groups are organized, orderly, and prepared to work slowly for change, "they also recognize that there is a whole other side out there that doesn't support bicycles. Y o u know when you get off the phone with them that they have understood, maybe they don't like it, but that's fine. When you get off the phone with an extremist you have no idea how what you said is going to come out." Councillor Price believes effective advocacy groups have experience, are sophisticated, understand trade-offs, and represent a broader range of opinion. "I can tell you one of the best examples [of effective cycling advocacy] is a single individual who had a good idea." Loren Whitehead was the first to present the idea of a bikeway system in Vancouver. "It was just the right idea at the right time, well argued with a little bit of research. He did it in a persistent, very rational, and thoughtful way." As McCune, Price thinks effective cycling advocacy groups are "prepared to work and take incremental improvements and shift strategies too." Doug Louie determines groups' effectiveness by asking, "are they professional, are they legitimate, do they speak for the majority?" Louie further explains, "the actions of an 46 organization speaks volumes. If they make a presentation to council, are the points that they bring up legitimate or are they out in left f ield?" 5.5 COMMUNICATION Communication within the cycling community and between the community and decision-makers in Vancouver tends to be informal and frequent. Typical means of communication is through telephone conversations, letters, meetings and email. Based on seven months of observation of the activity on the B E S T listserve, the introduction of the listserve to the cycling community, by Scott Nelson circa 1996, has proven to be a highly utilized tool; used by both cycling advocates and decision-makers. The listserve is used by the cycling community to quickly disseminate information, strategize, and round-up support for particular issues. Letter writing campaigns are frequently conducted via email. City staff and decision-makers also subscribe to the B E S T listserve. This creates a medium for open access and exchange of information, as well as ideas, between advocates, staff, and decision-makers. The city depends heavily on the B E S T listserve as a means of notifying the cycling community of upcoming public meetings concerning cycling projects and policies (Louie, pc 1999). Other groups, such as V A C C , B S W G , and the Bike Co-op, have also initiated listserves especially for their membership. It is uncertain whether the reliance of email to communicate tends to restrict out-reach to a small segment of advocates and limit those who do not have access to email. It is also uncertain how this may limit advocacy efforts overall. To communicate with the public and membership, both B E S T and V A C C produce quarterly newsletters. B E S T publishes the renowned Spoke n' Word and V A C C publishes The Urbane Cyclist. It is possible any limitations resulting from reliance on email may be alleviated somewhat by the distribution of these newsletters. A l l of the local bicycle advocacy groups have web sites as well (see complete list of web sites in the bibliography). 5.6 NETWORKING In one sense, the essence of an advocacy group is networking - meeting up with other like-minded people and working together on a problem or issue. 47 N e t w o r k i n g w i t h i n the c y c l i n g c o m m u n i t y , a n d t h e r e f o r e a m o n g c y c l i n g a d v o c a c y g r o u p s , i s s t r o n g i n V a n c o u v e r . T h e c o m m u n i t y uses i t s a l l i a n c e s to c r e a t e a s t r o n g l o b b y i n g f o r c e to p u s h the c y c l i n g a n d a l t e r n a t i v e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a g e n d a t h r o u g h c i t y , r e g i o n a l , a n d p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n m e n t . O v e r the c o u r s e o f the 10 yea r s f o r m a l l y o r g a n i z e d a d v o c a c y has e x i s t e d i n V a n c o u v e r , m e c h a n i s m s h a v e d e v e l o p e d that e n s u r e a s t r o n g a d v o c a c y p r e s e n c e i n p l a n n i n g f o r c y c l i s t s . F o r e x a m p l e , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o m v a r i o u s a r ea a d v o c a c y g r o u p s s i t o n the C i t y ' s B i c y c l e A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e ; t h i s e n a b l e s i n d i r e c t a d v o c a c y w i t h i n the a d v i s o r y r o l e o f the C o m m i t t e e . A s a r e su l t , c y c l i n g a d v o c a c y g r o u p s as a w h o l e d o n o t n e e d to s p e n d as m u c h t i m e a n d e n e r g y as the c i t y ' s c y c l i n g w a t c h d o g ( C a m p b e l l , p c 1 9 9 9 ) . T h e B A C i s an i n t e r n a l m e c h a n i s m that h e l p s to i n s u r e the in te res t s o f the c y c l i n g c o m m u n i t y are c o n s t a n t l y a d d r e s s e d w i t h i n the C i t y . O f c o u r s e , o n e c a n n o t i g n o r e the fac t that the B A C i s a p o l i t i c a l l y a p p o i n t e d c o m m i t t e e w h i c h f u n c t i o n s w i t h i n the p o l i t i c a l s t ruc tu re . T h e r e c e n t f o r m a t i o n o f c o a l i t i o n s at the p r o v i n c i a l a n d r e g i o n a l l e v e l s i s a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f i n t e n s i v e n e t w o r k i n g w i t h i n the c y c l i n g c o m m u n i t y . F o r m i n g c o a l i t i o n s w a s seen as n e c e s s a r y b y a d v o c a t e s i n o r d e r to p r o v i d e s i n g l e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e b o d i e s to c o m m u n i c a t e the in te res t s o f c y c l i s t s to g o v e r n m e n t s at the p r o v i n c i a l a n d r e g i o n a l l e v e l s . A c o a l i t i o n c a n m o r e e f f e c t i v e l y r ep re sen t the n e e d s o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c y c l i s t s t h a n e a c h o r g a n i z a t i o n a c t i n g o n i ts o w n . T h e V A C C r ep resen t s the e n t i r e L o w e r M a i n l a n d as o n e o f s e v e r a l r e g i o n a l c o a l i t i o n s t h r o u g h o u t the P r o v i n c e . O t h e r r e g i o n a l c o a l i t i o n s i n c l u d e G r e a t e r V i c t o r i a C y c l i n g C o a l i t i o n ( G V C C ) , G r e a t e r N a n a i m o C y c l i n g C o a l i t i o n ( G N C C ) a n d I s l a n d P a t h w a y s o n S a l t S p r i n g I s l a n d . O t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i n d i v i d u a l s , a n d c o r p o r a t i o n s j o i n these c o a l i t i o n s , t hus f o r m i n g an e x t e n s i v e n e t w o r k . I n f o r m a l c o a l i t i o n s are a l s o c o n s t a n t l y p r e sen t i n l o c a l a d v o c a c y a c t i v i t i e s . E a c h o f the a d v o c a c y g r o u p r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s i n t e r v i e w e d s ta ted t h e y w o r k e d w i t h o t h e r c y c l i n g g r o u p s . F o r e x a m p l e , V A C C a n d B E S T w o r k c l o s e l y t o g e t h e r o n m a n y c y c l i n g i s s u e s , B S W G w o r k s w i t h D C N , a n d B E S T a n d D C N h a v e s p o n s o r e d e v e n t s toge the r . 4 8 5.7 T H E PROCESS O F C Y C L I N G T R A N S P O R T A T I O N P O L I C Y D E V E L O P M E N T AND I M P L E M E N T A T I O N In an effort to uncover how the policy process actually works in the eyes of the people who are directly involved, the interviewees were asked how they thought the process of cycling policy and planning worked in the City of Vancouver. In common view, the policy process encompasses the development of broad policy, which leads to more detailed transportation policy, which further leads to the specifics of designing and carrying out individual projects. Policy development (as opposed to implementation) is relatively straight forward. In Vancouver, the model of the policy development process is exemplified by the process followed in writing the City's Transportation Plan. It is an incremental process based on stages of public participation. City staff began the process by; a) discussing issues based on existing policies, b) gathering input from interest groups and a public symposium, and c) developing an information campaign to help outline and contextualize various transportation issues for the public. Public discussion and input shaped an initial paper which outlined the key choices regarding transportation in the city. The key choices paper was presented at additional public meetings for further discussion. Input from this second round of public consultation went into the draft transportation plan. A third round of public meetings, with discussion and input, resulted in the final transportation plan. The challenge identified by most of the interviewees was working the broad policies into actual practices. Advocates, even when the policies are set at a high level, are concerned with ensuring that the policies are followed through. This introduces the complexities of the implementation process. Councillor Price discussed the implementation process summarized as follows; 1) a broad plan is approved (in the case of cycling the City's Comprehensive Bicycle Plan) and funding is allocated within a capital plan, 2) particular projects will go through the engineering department. These individual projects will go through a consultation process, generally the community itself will be surveyed, 3) the project goes back to council for final approval, and 4) initial construction begins. What dictates which projects move through this process is a matter of politics and initiation within the engineering staff. Which projects are approved is a matter of the combination of 49 initiation by staff, political will, and efforts of advocates. This implementation process blurs lines and leaves some advocates unsure whether an actual process even exists (for an example see Appendix 7). 5.8 THE ROLE OF THE MUNICIPALITY IN BICYCLE POLICY AND PLANNING In Vancouver, the role of the municipality in bicycle planning is heavily concentrated on engineering. The engineering department holds the power, authority, and budget to direct what happens in regard to bicycle planning within the city. Ultimately, City Council makes the final decision on projects and policy, but it is the engineering department which often directs the process (Louie, Nelson, Price, and Whistler, pc 1999). The presence of engineering staff who are aware of the benefits of planning for cyclists is essential to the progress of cycling in transportation planning (Campbell, Ho, and Nelson, pc 1999). A good, mutually respectful working relationship between the staff and bicycle advocates is also essential (Ho, Louie, and McCune, pc 1999). The B A C , with its direct connections to the cycling community, functions somewhat as a check and balance for cycling within the city. However, the agenda of the committee is directed by the engineering department and the projects it brings forward (Whistler, pc 1999). The institutionalization of cycling within the engineering department, and the rest of the city as well, was identified, by every person interviewed, as an important aspect of the role of the city in bicycle planning. "It really helps once there is some staff devoted to bicycle planning and once they get themselves educated on what are proper facilities and what are not" (Campbell, pc 1999). While the opinion of most of the people interviewed is that institutionalization is happening within the city, especially among those engineers who have been working on bicycle projects, it still poses a barrier to the progress of bicycle planning. "Some engineers are definitely more progressive than others, some others still have a long way to go" (Ho, pc 1999). "The [transportation] policy, the priority is correct. What is not correct is the fact that it is not engrained. That mentality, that set of priorities [pedestrians, cyclists, transit, then cars], is not entrenched within the actual practices of the city. I know it is a gradual thing, but we really have to push to loose that old mind set" (Nelson, pc 1999). 50 "[Cycling] has to be integrated into the whole system, not just an outside factor, it should be normal course of community design, hopefully in the end everyone should be concerned about bikes" (Louie, pc 1999). With the city focusing on building cycling facilities, the areas of education, encouragement, and enforcement have been absent from the role taken on by the city. "The education and encouragement part of [cycling planning] needs to be pushed. I think that's where the advocates are pushing right now" (Louie, pc 1999). 5.9 THE ROLE OF BICYCLE ADVOCACY IN THE L O C A L DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Bicycle advocates are both proactive and reactive in the decision-making process in Vancouver. Groups such as B E S T and V A C C wi l l give formal submissions at public hearings, make sure projects are looked at in terms of bicycle facilities, and are involved in the new policies being developed related to cycling. In general, cycling advocacy groups put forth a voice for cyclists and encourage decision-makers to continue to put resources into cycling. "The main thing is that [decision-makers] know there are cycling groups and cyclists that aren't going to go away and they know that i f they don't do what is appropriate for cyclists, we're going to bug them. Or when they do something right we show up and support them. If there's no group there, nobody making any noise, they probably aren't going to do that much. Which in a sense is the way it should be because there is a limited amount or resources, both financial and otherwise. If they aren't given the feedback or support, then they probably shouldn't do much" (Campbell, pc 1999). The role cycling advocacy groups play in the decision-making process is viewed as an important one by staff and council. "I think they make a big difference. If [advocacy groups] weren't there, then even though [cycling] may be a priority, in terms of the perspective of staff and council, it may not get the amount of services and facilities that they want soon enough" (Louie, pc 1999). Cycl ing advocates push the agenda along and enable some additional risk taking on staff's part. "If they push the system the system wi l l then come up with ways to address the problem" (Louie, pc 1999). A s a result of the push from cycling advocates, Price believes the city probably puts a disproportionate amount of resources into cycling as part of the existing modal mix. "We should be putting way more money perhaps into pedestrian activities. 51 More people walk than cycle, more people walk than drive cars probably. However, there are no pedestrian advocacy groups in Vancouver, except the disabled." Councillor Prices states, "cyclists are much more sophisticated [than other advocacy groups in the city]. They are prepared to work and take incremental improvements and shift strategies too. If it doesn't work, [they] go on to something that does." However, the question of how and when to push the system becomes a political game, as illustrated here; "[cycling advocacy groups] hinder the [planning] process when they push for the wrong things, or even the right things, at the wrong time" (Louie, pc 1999). The ambiguity of this statement and the implications it has on implementing cycling policy is not lost on cycling advocates. Scott Nelson talks at length about this issue in his interview; " A bunch of us have been pushing for 5,7 years for [the city] to put a bike lane in somewhere, anywhere downtown. They say, 'we have to wait for the downtown transportation plan'. Then, they just go ahead and threw an open house about a project to put bike lanes along Pender Street." Doug Louie explained the process leading up to the announcement of plans for the Pender Street bike lane downtown. "The City 's transportation plan asks for bike lanes in the downtown, we thought Burrard might be one [Pender connects Burrard to the existing Adanac bike route], and I heard a lot from cyclists that they wanted something downtown. So the policy is there, the advocacy is there, and in this case, the opportunity was there [the reconstruction of Pender street occurring as a result of the Europa development at Carrall and Pender Streets]." In the case of bikes lanes on Pender Street, the ambiguous 'timing' element, although frustrating to the cycling community, worked in their favor. A case where the timing element worked against the cycling community is the Burrard Street bike lane trial. Burrard Street was identified by cyclists as the major north/south cycling route connecting the west side of Vancouver to downtown. Furthermore, in its current configuration, the Burrard Street Bridge is dangerous for cyclists. The Ci ty ' s transportation plan identified Burrard Street as a priority for bike lanes. In 1995, the City Engineering Department removed a lane of traffic on the east side of the Burrard Street Bridge and converted it into a trial bike lane. Nelson describes the trial; "The thinking and the planning that went into it was very, very poor. Basically they ended up mangling the trial so it didn't really work for cyclists, and moreover, it really didn't work for the morning peak-hour rush-hour [car traffic] going into town 52 because they removed the lane from that side. They cut off any vehicle's ability to do the right hand expressway turn at the corner of Pacific and Burrard, as well as really pissed off the motorists. There was no end of phoning up the papers and complaining about this bike lane. So that has been a bit of a legacy in that the politicians heard about it and City Hall heard about it. So they continue to be gun-shy to this day about the idea of removing a lane of [car] traffic from the bridge." According to Doug Louie, "there was a lot of pressure from the [cycling] groups to do something. They pressured council to do something. Council decided to try it and the timing was all wrong, it didn't work. [The trial] is usually seen as an engineering fiasco, but I would say there was a whole bunch of circumstances. The trial should have ran for a week, it could have been better organized, consultation did take place but it took place in a hurry. People [car drivers] were pissed off, but that's expected. It's a good example of bad timing or happening too quickly." Councillor Price explains his perspective; "We still get criticism [from cycling advocacy groups] for the Burrard Street Bridge trial. We made a major political effort there, it was the wrong timing. It was poorly thought out. There's a real danger in trying to move too quickly at the wrong time with the wrong project. We still get badly beaten up on that, except we've moved on now to other issues. We'll come back to it eventually, when the time is right. It'll still be a while." How an advocate is supposed to know when the time is right for applying pressure is uncertain. Regardless, timing appears to be a major component of the role of the bicycle advocate in the decision-making process, whether they know how to anticipate it or not. 5.10 W H A T IS G O O D PLANNING F O R CYCLISTS? The issues addressed in the responses to this question from the advocacy groups varied from, cycling as one part of a bigger picture of transportation and land-use, to stakeholder involvement, to types of cyclists and facilities. Good planning for cycling also involves commitment from government and staff who are devoted to, and educated about, cycling. "If we are talking about bicycle planning it has to be part of the bigger picture so that our communities are designed where people can access things without having to get into a car. The problem with the way our region is designed is everything was designed around the car. If you 5 3 think people and access, that will encompass the pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, and then the details are bicycle facilities and whether you put a bike route here or a bike path here. It is all in the way we think about how people need to get around" (Ho, pc 1999). In regard to the importance of stakeholder involvement; "There's an appropriate time to have the consultation. I think it is useful if [the city] comes up with the initial plan, then when it's still a good time for input without incurring extra costs or delaying the project, that is the appropriate time to consult. Then just have a sign off before the project start just to make sure any little changes are appropriate" (Campbell, pc 1999). In terms of facility planning, after years of 'infighting' within the cycling community, (spurred by the philosophy of John Forester that cyclists do best when treated like cars) the consensus among Vancouver cycling advocacy groups seems to be that all types of facilities are needed; from separate paths, to bike lanes, to traffic calmed streets, to wider curb lanes. "It depends on the circumstances as to what the appropriate facility is" (Campbell, pc 1999). Although, debate within the cycling community still occurs around this subject it no longer posses as significant a barrier as it has in the past.15 "When you are doing bike planning and bike policy you have to think about three or four different kinds of cyclists. [Good planning] at least recognizes that if you can address the needs for all those cyclists, then you can potentially have a huge decrease in cars and roadway space needs. If [advocates] are not thinking about all of those, then you're not going to be as effective as you could be and you'll contribute towards infighting among the different factions rather than the promotion of cycling in general" (Buehler, pc 1999). "Good policy is also to put in roughly equivalent funding. If nothing else, if you have a bikeway that has a thousand people riding on it per day, maybe it's appropriate to call that an arterial street instead of just a bike path. Then give it priority funding and priority maintenance just like it was any other arterial street" (Buehler, pc 1999). 1 5 Recently on the V A C C listserve the inherent usefulness of bike lanes was criticized by one cyclist. While the most active advocates involved in the group re-enforced their belief that all types of facilities are needed, as is reflected in V A C C ' s statement of values and list of goals, other individuals remain adamant of their stance against bike lanes. My observation of the arguments used in the debate by those who objected to the bike lanes revealed the real issue is not the type of facility that is best but rather lack of education among cyclists, motorists, and pedestrians that poses a barrier to the success of any type of facility. ( V A C C listserve July 12-14, 1999) 5 4 C H A P T E R 6 C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 6 .1 C O N C L U S I O N S In answering the theoretical question of this thesis, what elements contribute to effective lobbying by cycling advocacy groups in local government decision-making processes, the following conclusions are made. This thesis found the role bicycle advocacy groups play in the transportation decision-making process to be important to the progress of bicycle planning. Other studies of groups in policy communities indicate that what has been found in this thesis, as applied to cycling advocacy groups and the local decision-making process in Vancouver, is relatively universal to policy processes in general. "We discover that different types of groups tend to follow predictable behaviour patterns - patterns related to what the political system expects of groups, and to the resources that groups bring to the process" (Pross 1992, 16). As demonstrated by interview responses, effectiveness can be associated with many factors including; goals, organizational structure, approach, money and resources, networking and coalition building, timing, persistence, political climate, and even luck. It is difficult to separate the combined influence of goals, organizational structure, and approach on effectiveness. It is observed from this research that groups who lobby in a persistent, well thought-out, rational, and respectful manner tend to be better received by area decision-makers, and therefore wi l l appear to be more influential over bicycle policy and planning in the Vancouver area. As stated by Zander (1990, 171), the success of an advocacy group in influencing decision-makers "depends on how correctly they estimate what ideas and style of delivery wi l l be most acceptable to the target persons". Similarly Pross (1992, 15) states, the policy process is highly bureaucratic and the most successful groups are those that know who to talk to (and when) and are able to communicate in a bureaucratic fashion, with briefs, working papers, and professional consultations, rather than with placards and demonstrations. "Persuasion depends on organization. Modern governments are not easily convinced. Persistence, extensive knowledge of substantive issues and policy processes, and the financial resources necessary to communicate with the public and with government are all essential ingredients in a lobbying campaign. Common objectives must be worked out, procedures adopted, responsibilities 55 assigned, and consistent positions formulated if a group is to persuade government to take specific action and if it is to watch over the development and implementation of supporting policies" (Pross, 1992). It appears from this research that the approaches taken by the majority of cycling advocacy groups in Vancouver reflect the above statements. The individuals who have been involved in cycling advocacy efforts over the last ten years in Vancouver indicate they have learned that the rational, amiable, flexible, and non-confrontational approach appeals most to Vancouver decision-makers. Although such forms of lobbying are necessary, the experience of bicycle advocates and decision-makers in Vancouver suggest they alone are not sufficient. Both cycling advocates and decision-makers dealing in cycling issues in the Vancouver area state that having a variety of approaches - from radical to mainstream, direct-action to lobbying - is important to the overall success of cycling advocacy as a whole. Therefore, my first conclusion is that the combined presence of different types of advocacy groups and approaches increases any one group's influence over policy.16 A related observation is that the effectiveness of any one advocacy group increases if these groups form networks and coalitions around specific issues or a common goal. My second conclusion is that the factors that inhibit bicycle advocacy groups' effectiveness and influence tend to be associated more with external factors, rather than to insufficiencies in trj^ e bicycle advocacy groups themselves. The barriers identified by local bicycle advocacy groups are all linked to the attitudes of individuals, which are ultimately reflected in the lack of political will of decision-makers, or their inability to make political decisions that reflect the directives of the City's transportation and cycling policies.17 The three main barriers identified by Vancouver cycling advocacy groups are; 1. Attitudes of individuals (obsession with the car, not taking cycling seriously) and other cyclists (internal debate over what cyclists want and how to get it, accepting too many compromises): "One of the main barriers is there are still a lot of people who don't take cycling seriously, they don't think a significant portion of the population will cycle. There 1 6 This importance is also supported by the research of Gardner (1990). 1 7 Political will is be defined as the balance between protest and support; inertia, or the force of precedent which is the product of habitual thinking and practice, keeps the status quo (Hanna, 1990). 56 are even some people in the cycling community who don't believe a lot of people wi l l cycle even given the proper facilities. But what we have seen in other cities is that you could easily get 5%. It is a mind set" (Campbell, pc 1999). 1 8 2. The legacy of John Forester and 'old school' transportation engineers: A whole generation of engineers and cyclists have grown up indoctrinated with the philosophy, that cyclists do best when they are treated like cars (Nelson, pc 1999). However, there is no conclusive evidence that shows that any one method - cycling in traffic, in bike lanes, or on separated bike paths - is any more safe than the others (Moritz, 1998). This posses a constant struggle for advocates who recognize that the best way to increase the number of people cycling is to have facilities that accommodate different levels and styles of cyclists (Buehler, Campbell, and Nelson, pc 1999). 3. Politics - lack of political w i l l , political climate, and budget not being allocated according to transportation priorities as stated in policy: "If government really wanted to make the change that they say they do, they would put more money into the budget [for cycling]" (Ho, pc 1999). Each of these barriers are associated with insufficient education and awareness around cycling components of bicycle transportation principles that are known to be lacking in bicycle planning for the City of Vancouver, the G V R D , and the Province of British Columbia. Therefore, my third conclusion is that the lack of cycling education and awareness limits the implementation and success of cycling transportation policies. Implications of this third conclusion relate to what should be the next steps of the Vancouver bicycle program. At the time of the inception of bicycle planning in the City of Vancouver in the late 1980s, engineers working on cycling issues were instructed to spend no more than 10% of their time working on cycling issues (Louie, pc 1999). At the present time the Engineering Department has close to 4 full time equivalent staff working on bike projects. However, no one In Vancouver, cycling is at 2% of the modal split. In other cities, such as Victoria, it is at !0%. Five percent is typically considered a realistic goal for Vancouver. Some European cities are up to 30%. 57 person dedicates all of their time to cycling, nor do they work beyond the engineering aspects of bicycle planning. Vancouver did have a full time bicycle coordinator, but this position was cut in 1989 with the rationale that such a position deters from the institutionalization of planning for cycling in the engineering department (Louie and Whistler, pc 1999). Although this rationale makes sense on one level, it is clear from this research that of the 4 E ' s (engineering, education, enforcement and encouragement) cited as essential to successful cycling planning, the latter three are neglected by the Engineering Department. Understandably because it is not the Engineering Department's mandate to allocate budget for components outside of engineering. Even though the presence and quality of facilities is essential to a successful cycling program, it is clear from this research that the future state of cycling in Vancouver is dependent on more attention being paid to education, enforcement, and encouragement. Vancouver needs a full time Bicycle Coordinator. 1 9 A s prescribed by the principles of successful cycling planning a balanced comprehensive approach must be taken to insure a wide ranging model shift and a high level of safety for cyclists. This entails combining the construction of facilities with the education of cyclists and motorists, promotional campaigns to encourage a modal shift, and consistency in enforcement of traffic laws. Additionally these components should be coordinated on all levels of government -municipal, regional, and provincial. After ten years of focusing on engineering, there is an apparent need to bolster the progress made in bicycle facility planning in Vancouver with efforts to increase ridership through education, encouragement and promotion. This requires, in addition to the institutionalization of cycling in the engineering department, a coordinated effort that extends beyond the confines of Engineering and even the City itself. This work can only be achieved by the dedication of a full time staff person committed to implementing the Ci ty 's cycling policy. A full time staff person whose mandate was to coordinate and manage a bicycle planning program would be able to better develop a comprehensive program, rather than a program limited to the engineering aspects of bicycle planning. B y default, engineers planning for cycling are limited to the engineering aspects of bicycle planning. The current absence of a full time staff person dedicated to coordinating the City 's bicycle program relates to the problem of policy implementation. Evidence appears in the 1 9 Although some think there is a full time Bicycle Coordinator, there in fact is not. 58 discussion of the cycling transportation policy process (section 5.7) that policy is developed with great public consultation efforts only to be handed over to the engineering department which then implements the policy in an ad hoc, preferential manner. This is identified by cycling advocates, as well as by engineering staff, as being problematic and frustrating. Therefore, the final observation of this thesis is that there should be a more transparent process for turning policies into actual projects. Better mechanisms should be developed to ensure that the spirit of transportation and cycling plans are implemented by the engineering department. Developing an implementation process would relieve some of the burden felt by cycling advocacy groups to have to constantly lobby for the implementation of existing policies. The presence of a bicycle coordinator would resolve some of the problems associated with implementation, because the purpose of the position would be to ensure the comprehensive and coordinated.implementation of the cycling policy. In addition, implementation plans and schedules for the allocation of budget should be developed, according to the directives written in policy, as part of the initial policy development and public participation processes. This would help insure that no department is left with uncertainty regarding how to implement the policy. 59 6.2 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 1) A comparison between bicycle advocacy groups in different cities, and perhaps other types of advocacy groups, would offer substantial insight into the role and influence of advocacy in decision-making and what methods they use to work effectively. 2 0 In the context of Vancouver advocacy groups, why are bicycle advocates effective while others, particularly transit advocates, are not? How does the personality of advocates influence effectiveness? How does the nature of what one is advocating for influence effectiveness (e.g. cycling vs. transit)? 2) A n analysis of the similarities in the attitudes of advocates, staff, and decision-makers and discussion of how discrepancies can be resolved could result in suggestions for how to improve the consultation processes between decision-makers, planners and advocacy groups. Another possible extension of this research would be to examine the openness of government agencies to the knowledge and experience of citizen groups. 3) What is the interplay between different agencies involved in bicycle planning? 4) Develop indicators for the successful implementation of bicycle policies - a timeline with major milestones (e.g., formation of lobbing groups, adoption of polices, major advocacy campaigns, etc.) and correlate these to measurables (e.g., creation of advisory committees, hiring of dedicated staff, allocation of funds, etc.). 5) How does the role of any one level of government in bicycle policy and planning changes when cyclists hold positions of authority? Minister L a l i , Councillor Price, and Insurance Corporation of British Columbia ( ICBC) President Tom Thompson are all cyclists (van Loon, 1999). One could assume this strongly influences how cycling is perceived and treated in the political arena. For example, the Province's Interim Cycl ing Policy is finally going through the finalization process after seven years of being interim, and I C B C this year for the first time has appointed a cycling representative to the President's 2 0 An interview by the New York City bicycle advocacy group, Transportation Alternatives, shows examples of some of the commonalities that can be found (see Appendix 9). 60 Advisory Committee. Francis van Loon stated that because Minister Lali is a cyclist he is sympathetic and this makes him more willing to look work on cycling issues. When asked how cycling advocacy groups affect transportation policy on the provincial level, Katherine McCune stated, "cycling advocacy, when [the interim cycling policy] first came out, was pretty small and it has grown tremendously. I think it will be reflected in the next version of the policy." It would be interesting to look at how the provincial policy changes as a result of the work of cycling advocacy groups. This question could also be extended to the how cycling advocacy groups are influencing the development and policies of TransLink. In light of the evidence presented in this thesis that the current bicycle planning process seems ad hoc and based on staff preferences and the piggy-backing of bicycle facility planning on the seemingly unrelated development opportunities that arise, it would be interesting to research how planners and engineers identify and prioritize projects, both in the past and present. 61 B I B L I O G R A P H Y American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ( A A S H T O ) (1991) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities Babbie, E .R. (1992) The practice of social research Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co. Banister, D . (1994) Transport Planning London: E & F N S P O N B E S T (1999) How to Lobby for Alternative Transportation Bicycle Federation of America (1993) The Bicycle Advocate's Action Kit Campbell, R. and T. Adams (1989) 'The Bicycle as an Effective Transport Mode ' 14 t h Australian Transport Research Forum Checkoway, B . (1995) 'Six Strategies of Community Change' Community Development Journal 30(1) pp. 2-20 City of Vancouver (1988) Vancouver Comprehensive Bicycle Plan Vancouver: Engineering Dept. (1990) Clouds of Change Vancouver: Task Force on Atmospheric Change (1992) Bicycle Network Study Vancouver: Engineering Dept. (1992) City plan: a proposal to set "directions for Vancouver" Vancouver: Planning Dept. (1997) City Transportation Plan Vancouver: City of Vancouver. Cloward, R. and F. Fox Piven (1984) 'Introduction'. In Roots to Power: A Manual for Grassroots Organizing. Staples, L . Cote, A . (1999) 'The Best Cycl ing Cities' in Bicycling pp. 53-59 Dougherty, N . and W . Lawrence (1974) Bicycle Planning U S Environmental Protection Agency Dluhy, M . (1990) Building Coalitions in the Human Services London: Sage Durning, A . (1996) The Car and the City Seattle: Northwest Environment Watch Ell ison, B . (1998) 'The Advocacy Coalition Framework and Implementation of the Endangered Species Act ' Policy Studies Journal 26(1) pp. 11-29 Freeman, J .L. (1965) The Political Process New York: Random House 62 Forester, J. (1984) Effective Cycling Cambridge: M I T Press (1994) Bicycle Transportation second ed. Cambridge:MIT Press Gardner, J. (1990) Pressure Group Politics and the Campaign to Protect South Moresby Island U B C Planning Papers Discussion Paper #22 G V R D (1994) Transport 2021 (1995) Livable Region Strategic Plan Hanna, J. (1990) "Feet First: Putting People at the Centre of Planning'. In R. Tolley (ed.), The Greening of Urban Transport (pp. 88-96). London: Belhaven Press Helco, H . (1978) 'Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment'. In A . K i n g (ed.), The New American Political System (pp. 87-124). Washington, D C : American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Helco, H . and Wildavsky, A . (1974) The Private Government of Public Money London: Hyman John, P. and A . Cole (1995) 'Models of Local Decision-Making Networks in Britian and France' Policy and Politics 23(4) pp. 303-312 Jones, F. (1996) Understanding Organizations: A Sociological Perspective Toronto: Copp Clark Ltd. Kunstler, J .H. (1993) The Geography of Nowhere New York: Simon and Schuster Lee, D . (1973) 'Requiem for large scale models' American Institute of Planners 39(2) pp. 163-178 Lowe, M . (1989) The Bicycle: Vehicle for a Small Planet Washington D C : Worldwatch (1990) Alternatives to the Automobile: Transport of Livable Cities Washington D C : Worldwatch Hope, D and D . Yachuk (1990) Community Cycling Manual: A Planning and Design Guide Canadian Institute of Planners Hudson, M . (1982) Bicycle Planning: Policy and Practice London: The Architectural Press Lagerwey, P. (1988) 'Institutionalizing Bicycl ing in the Transportation Planning Process' in ProBike 88 Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Bicycle Programs and Promotions Washington, D C : B F A 63 Mah, B . (1995) Review and Evaluation of the Strategy Behind Bicycle Transportation Policy in Greater Vancouver School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia Marin, B . and R. Mayntz eds. (1991) Policy Networks Boulder: Westview Press Moritz, W . (1998) 'Adult Bicyclists in the United States - Characteristics and Riding Experience in 1996' presented at the Transportation Research Board 77 t h Annual Meeting, January 11-15, 1998 M o T H (1992) Interim Cycling Policy Mozer, D . (1991) Cascade Bicycle Club Government Affairs Committee Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Policy and Advocacy Handbook Seattle: Cascade Bicycle Club. Available on line at http://www.ibike.org/gac/Hb2-Structure.htm Nelson, S. (1999) 'Act ivism in the Lower Mainland' . Available on line at http://www.sustainability.com/BSWG/presentation2/index.htm Newman, P. and J. Kenworthy (1989) Cities and Automobile Dependence: An International Sourcebook Sydney: Gower Technical Orum, A . M . (1991) A Case for the Case Study Chapel H i l l : University of North Carolina Press Perrucci, R. and H . Potter (1986) Networks of Power New York: Aldine de Gruyter Pinsof, S. and T. Musser (1995) Bicycle Facility Planning American Planning Association Pross, A . P . (1992) Group Politics and Public Policy Toronto: Oxford University Press Replogle, M . (1983) Bicycles and Public Transportation Washington, D . C : Bicycle Federation Roseland, M . (1992) Towards Sustainable Communities Sabatier, P. (1987) 'Knowledge, policy-oriented learning, and policy change' Knowledge, Creation, Diffusion, Utilization vol. 8 pp. 649-92 Staples, L . (1984) Roots to Power: A Manual for Grassroots Organizing New York: Praeger Tolley, R. and B . Turton. (1995) Transport Systems, Policy and Planning New York, N Y : Wiley. Training Resources for the Environmental Community (1999) Compass Points: Environmental Leadership Forum Seattle 64 U S Department of Transportation Federal Highway Association (1993) Analyses of Successful Provincial, State, and Local Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs in Canada and the United States Case Study No. 18 (1993) Integrating Bicycle and Pedestrian Considerations Into State and Local Transportation Planning, Design, and Operations Case Study No. 21 (1994) The National Bicycle and Walking Study Final Report Wackernagel, M . and W . Rees (1996) Our Ecological Footprint Gabriola Island: New Society Zander, A . (1990) Effective Social Action by Community Groups San Francisco: Jossey-Bass WEB SITES People Not Cars http://www.monkeywrenchcafe.org/pnc/ Vancouver Critical Mass http://www.monkeywrenchcafe.org/cm/home.htm San Francisco Critical Mass http://www.sflandmark.com/cm/howto.htm British Columbia Cycl ing Network http://www.bccc.bc.ca/ Better Environmentally Sound Transportation http://www.best.bc.ca/ Burrard Street working Group http://www.sustainability.com/bswg/ Cycling B C http://www.cycling.bc.ca/ Vancouver Area Cycl ing Coalition http://www.vcn.bc.ca/vacc/ A M S Bike Co-op http://www.trek.ubc.ca/bikecoop/ Bicycle People http://www.altematives.com/bicycle/people.html 65 A P P E N D I X 1 I N T E R V I E W S Cheeying Ho, Executive Director, B E S T , June 9, 1999 Richard Campbell, President, V A C C , M a y 28, 1999 Francis van Loon, President, B C C C , June 10, 1999 Scott Nelson, B S W G , M a y 27, 1999 Ted Buehler, President, A M S Bike Co-op, M a y 27, 1999 Guy Wera, Spokesperson, Bicycle People, June 2, 1999 Russell Adams, Critical Mass, June 3, 1999 Lee Henderson, D A F F Peter Stary, V P Recreation and Transportation, Cycl ing B C , M a y 28, 1999 John Whistler, former Chair Vancouver B A C , June 1, 1999 Doug Louie, Engineering Department, City of Vancouver, M a y 28, 1999 Gordon Price, Vancouver City Councillor, June 3, 1999 Ken Kuo, Transit Service Planner, Implementation Planning Department, TransLink, June 3, 1999 (via email) Katherine McCune, Development Approvals Person, Lower Mainland District, M o T H , June 13, 1999 Alan Callander, Policy Analyst, Highway Planning and Policy Branch, M o T H , June 18, 1999 (via email) 66 APPENDIX 2 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Bicycle Advocacy Groups 1. How and why did your group form? 2. What are the goals of your group? 3. What is your approach meeting your goals? What strategies do you use? 4. What are the things that help or hinder this process? 5. What are the barriers you have to contend with? 6. How do you get over these barriers? 7. How is your organization structured? 8. How does the group stay organized and working 9. What are the methods of communication within your organization - among staff, among board members and among other members and between staff, board and members? 10. How do you define your effectiveness? 11. How do you determine whether you have been effective? 12. What are some of your accomplishments? 13. Do you work with other bicycle advocacy groups? Which ones? 14. Do you work with other types of advocacy groups other than cycling? Which ones? 15. How do you interact with these other groups? 16. How do these relationships and interactions contribute to your effectiveness? 17. What is the relationship between your group and policy-making agencies (e.g. local, provincial, federal government)? 18. How do you work with these agencies? 19. How do these relationships and interactions contribute to your effectiveness? 20. What do you think constitutes good planning for cyclists and good cycling policy? 21. How does the transportation/bicycle policy process work? How does policy form? 22. How does your group affect transportation policy - development and implementation? Planners and Government Officials 1. What do you think constitutes good planning for cyclists and good cycling policy? 2. How does the transportation/bicycle policy process work? (How does policy form?) 3. Do you work with bicycle advocacy groups? Which ones? 4. What is your relationship with bicycle advocacy groups? 5. How do you communicate/interact with these groups? 6. Which of these groups, in your opinion, are most effective and why? 7. How do you think these groups affect transportation policy development and implementation? 8. Do these groups help or hinder the decision-making process? 67 % 3 O o c T3 g> o cr -p g £ Q H OQ OQ <i o p B" •>5 O Pi ct © G M C/3 H O H HH 3 C/3 O C/3 M C/3 n o < W HH o o r w >• o < i o o • o •< o o |C/2 CD 3 cr> O a g Cn o 3 Cu 3" o K c. Ct 3^  £L cu g 5 5 o 3 ^ S" t» 2 3 O p r/5 Cu P H o °- n> 2 OQ OQ s I s < Crt o rr P 3 00 3" P 5' » OQ £ y ct o OQ o O O ~* j 5 OQ - I T) ' H 9 B Q 3. g P O TJ - P P rt OQ S -a B Pf 3 p ^ o c p . — 9 s « g- g- g: s g Cu l" x ct rt _i P O p 3 c. &• ? o Cl 3 « S-< ct OQ p 3 Cu o o" P > o P -t (T> 3 ct T3 O S O ~. -t O 3 3 5 O P 3 1' ° P ci cx cT P "8 I. £ & £• 0 5 » ti b 3 3 ft 3 -• ^ 1 i -p t ^s £ ° S- (t C OOQ 3 3- < 3 J a O O •< -a 5" S OQ g 3. S' p n» S 3 o o 5^- CTQ P o p 0Q Ct P 3 S. P ct O -a -1 ct O 3 ° S 3 Ct P cn S p •o o • 2. H qo_ o 3" cn p 5 < Ct Ct n o • OQ 3 O < o OQ C. O CO T3 8 f oT2 .3 ^ <g 3- a P <J P Ct O GO ct cn o o ^ ^ ^ Si S S S o 3 co &n ps ?P ?5 ^ 13 T3 3 OQ 5 3 Ct OQ P 3 _ P . Vl a. c • • "° Pi. CO y ct ct ct 2. p o 3 cr =• g -3 3j ct o' ^ ^ tn < o ~ OQ Q- - p P CT t^ ct O 3 S Ct °. 5.13 1 m 3 5!0Q OQ y 3 o P OQ < 3 3 ra Ct T3, cr o rt ct " " 3 o o 3 Ct U 3 o •< o_ cT i _ o ct a. a s« 3" p cu o n a-ct ^ B. OQ 3 P 13 3 o cr cr B ct 5' o OQ ft O* 3" o Cu t- S--2. tt Ct p 3 w C Ct C/3 O H =r 3 o ft ct 8 W cr =• 2 o Cu p __ o 3 p -i Cu 3 ct 13 13 "d „' O H OQ 3 £ . P p ^ 3- 2 f%- n —• tO OQ ° -j, cu X ct cr O ct (Jo " £L 3 OQ = 3 - 1 p p Ct 3 cn ' < P 3 Cu cn cr. •< ct " < 3 P Ct P Cu < Ct 3 ^ 3- Ct fe? OQ Ct c» CL OQ Ct rt -1 p § s. Cu cu Ct p cr • o> . c» 3 P 3 •< cr o p Cu g. P H ° cr ocr ft 3 Ct ^ rV cn Ct P a 8 » "•0 w o r B3 H O o r z o a o 63 O O o > o o Cd CZ! O o • o *0 JO w C/3 O z C/3 6. Methods of communication w/in organization? 5. How is your organization structured? 4. What are the barriers you contend with? QUESTION I have a list of people to call - we are all friends It is mostly me Cyclists Representative democracy City officials not following through with policy implementation Lack of political will BICYCLE PEOPLE RESPONSE I Membership Board of Directors Executive Director Staff Individual attitudes Political attitudes Gov't budget allocation Lack of political will 1 he way cities are designed BEST RESPONSE I I Attitudes - having to continually justify importance of cycling to decision-makers Internal debate over how much effort should go into transportation advocacy CYCLING BC RESPONSE I Volunteer run, Board of Directors, Membership i BCCC RESPONSE Email is a really valuable tool Newsletter, Monthly meeting Volunteer run, Board of Directors, membership People not taking cycling seriously, cyclists who do not believe more people will cycle given proper facilities, political climate, money not being allocated, implementation of policies, disagreement w/in cycling community over what to lobby for VACC RESPONSE To keep from feeling burnt-out email is big for us and we try to keep it to keep one or two meetings a month. Volunteer run, not registered as a non-profit The legacy of John Forester's opposition to bike lanes. The city's trial bike lane over the Burrard Street Bridge Engineering Department not championing for cycling and being set in the old mind-set of focusing on keeping traffic flowing BSWG RESPONSE Mainly email People bump into each other and start talking and planning Phone calls Began volunteer run, grant money will be used to hire staff for summer '99 Lack of volunteer commitment, space and managerial skills on my part. BIKE CO-OP RESPONSE 69 9. How do these relationships contribute to your effectiveness? 8. Do you work w/ other bicycle advocacy groups? 7. How do you define or measure your effectiveness? QUESTION It makes us more effective. PNC and VACC. We're affiliated with a lot of organizations through the BC Environmental Network. It is hard to tell BICYCLE PEOPLE RESPONSE VACC's work relieves us of doing specific bicycle advocacy work We work closely with VACC. We support BSWG's position We sponsored a Bike Week event with DCN Demand for products Media hits Number of volunteers Word-of-mouth BEST RESPONSE I Yes I CYCLING BC RESPONSE Yes Indicators are having many regional coalitions join BCCC for Provincial lobbying, institutionalization of cycling in staff, a Provincial BAC BCCC RESPONSE It is very important, different groups can focus on different issues around cycling We keep in communication with all of them -DCN, BSWG, BEST, Cycling BC, Bicycle People. \Afim nf^rc r\T VACC are on the Vancouver BAC Look at our goals and see what has been happening, hard to judge because other groups and individuals are pusrnng lor inc same things VACC RESPONSE I When we are near completion we will ask for the support of BEST and VACC; DCN is already on our side. By how far the City moves towards getting bike lanes on Burrard. BSWG RESPONSE There is strength in numbers. Politicians see a larger entity and will pay more attention Loosely. We have met with the President of VACC and asked BEST to write a letter once in opposition of a project effecting the Off-Broadway bikeway We have exceeded all the goals we set a year ago. If we build an organization that will last after the people who are there right now are gone. BIKE CO-OP RESPONSE 70 11. What do you think constitutes good planning for cyclists? 10. What is the relationship between your group and policy-making agencies QUESTION Car-free streets Speed limit reduction We do not interact well with bureaucrats who are not bicycle friendly, BICYCLE PEOPLE RESPONSE Looking at the bigger picture. Thinking access instead of mobility Very good with the City of Vancouver Still developing on with the GVRD Some still see us as only a cycling group BEST RESPONSE I I CYCLING BC RESPONSE Planning with cyclists, getting them involved in the early stages It is starting, they know we are there BCCC RESPONSE Some level of bicycle infrastructure, staff devoted to cycling planning and educate properly on what is appropriate lor cyclists, consultation with cyclists Fairly informal, when an issue comes up they contact us for input VACC RESPONSE Need to have all types of facilities for all types of cyclists Increase the safety and the perception of safety - that's why bike lanes are important It is very clear what we want and we are not negotiating or compromising. At one point the BAC asked if we wanted to become one of their sub-committees but we declined the offer. BSWG RESPONSE Planning for different kinds of cyclists. We have given the University tons of good PR BIKE CO-OP RESPONSE 71 o c CD co rO c CD co o c rt> C/3 o c CD o c CD o c CD co O 3 ON O 3 O 3 O 3 O J o 3 to o 3 H H O 3 - 3 - 0 1—t •—t 1—t CD CD 3 CD CD a 3 3^ o ' era era 1-1 -1 o o c c .. co co cr 3 o CD ' CL Co CD 3 CD 3" PXI 3" C CD CD a co 3 P. p Q 3-CD CD era era era 3. o o s c 13 13 on cn N P 3 " P < CD £0 <-> cr o O CD o (rt o a CO O C » 2 —J fV) Co 3-% <» CD Q -S 2 3 O CD C CD CD O 3 <' CD CD O rt-o 1-1 o o 3 3 13 H=) CL O O H 51 51 3 3 ^ 0 0 CD CD o fi fi ^ era era era era O c >T3 cri & rt. ^. C L CD C L £_L CL CD CD CD O c 13 O c 13 3 3, C 3 3 3 A CD & C L I s * o p C L C L < CO E2 co 3 Ct CD ET CD CO '"l X3 C CD CO CD CD CD C L C L C L O 13 3-cr £'. < o' CO CD 3 era o ^ 3 3 CD 3 CD 5-a C L 2- CD 3 co era 3 CL Hera H 3" 9 3" H EL 3. CD £7* CD CD f° CD era era a a O O c c 13 13 CO CO & 5: C L CD 3 3, S 5i B - CD g C L < S?> CD O j o era § B. & 5 5 3 2. CO S» C L 3" fi- ^ CO <, CO < CD 3-C L S T 3' S _ sr-CD 2. a' 3' CD CD era a O 3 13 co CO 3 CL Co era CD 3 o CD' co CO CO Co CO H H 3" sr a a CD CD CD CD era era a a O O 3 3 13 13 CO CO CL CL CD CD 3 3 H H O > ? ? 3 t ) o o CD era era ^ o c 13 o c 13 13 a O CO o sr CD CD CL o" cr cr <^ 3 ' era CO CO rt- CO rt. CL CL CL CD CD CD 2. 3 3 S. r*t. CT. ^ ttrj rti CD CD' CD ' CL CL CL co 3 O Cf 3 ,3 0 1 co era CD 3 Si. 3" era N CD o 2 & v C L 3. ^  CL o 3 to _ " 2 rt- CO CD CL CD CL 3 O P irt 5" 3 CO 3 C L I d cf =r p 3: ^ <§. '-I >— 2 CD 3 < CD CD p" 3 3 g O CD CD S P a era era no a a 42 0 0 3 C C rt 1 3 ^ 1 3 ^ CO CO (rt P CO CO era ^ O Q rt £L C L $ P CO CD 3-a CD era f^ ' 1 | . | rt- CO P O 3 " *< era era o CD era CD 3 CD CD 5 ? P 3 CD CO O 3 3 p 1-1 CL 00 (rt c2 CD (rt o o C L  CD 3 3-P 3 O CD O 13 13 O 3> c 3 CD O 5' era P 2-3 CD CD sr CD era a O c 13 72 o c CD iO 3 CD cn o 3 rc CO o c rs cn o 3rc cn O 3 O3 O 3 v© O 3 oo o 3 0 H s ^ <w era 1 3 3 CO S ™ a CL rc __ D , ~ ^ po 3- < W 3/ era era £L to <<: |-+> rc p cn rc < o rc P. H O ^ s 0 f era era 1 i 13 "° cn • CL CL 2 rc 3 3 ff ff ff1 ff! rc' rc CL 8 I 3 a. cn 3 £ era 5- * era ct rc Q 3 O ff. v^ - cn O 3"! O 5 2 era CL ^ gi fo g 2 3 era ^ rc cn O |-b O 3' <T 00 Q era " o o 3 3 13 cn CL ff rc g. 3, n ff. cn rc o D- o O CL ? ff1 ° rc cr n ,5 cn era a § 3' era I O O 3 3 rc ro era era < o o 3 C 13 13 ' cn cn cn cn S- & rc rc CL CL ro H 41 cr o rc rc era i-i o era i o c 13 cn cn % to i-t rc rc CL =* ^ 2. o CL 3 O ^ 3-* CO 3" 0 0 ^ S ro ff-CL 5; c-f 1 ST! era cn g •2 3 n> cn cn ff. 3" O 2-3 ro ro $ ro o <" ro 3 ro rc < ro 3 era I-I o c 13 cn cn t—t-CO t—t-ro CL ro o 3" ro i-i era I-I o 3 13 cn O H O O H 3 cr 3 3 ? rc i rc ro rc o era o era era era i o I-I o era -t o i o 3 o 3 3 13 c 13 13 13 13 cn CL CL sai CO ro rc sai cn CL 3 3 CL 3 rc CT. r-^ O 3 ff! ff! r t r-ft rc' ro' was h aske fied CL 3 ro 3 dde: was h CL 3 3 CO 1 cr eeti CT Co 3 CL cn eeti ro ii CL (—h O que 3 era i—h cn 3" l3" for 2-cn 3" 13 <—^  eir j -1 ion eir j ipo ro cn C 3 ro ro 3 O Co 3 O cn 73 1 tt O 3 o V! cn •j>< o T J T J CD O co o C L O P S o 3 RT Q x P P "a_ -a co O p era o o C L P o o 3 3' C C 3 5 H 3 2T"13 cc i _ o VO cn ~j cn CO M CO 3 -1 3 O. | % 5- 3 p co £• § & o c era sr < 3 o co ° s. r» CO 3 " < co co a. CD a" p O £ C L ^ ^ P 3 C P a. co P 3 ' TJ ^ 3 S - S C I 3. CO tn p <: „. S ^ < £• ° 2. c. er o rt n 0 P <T 1 3 31 « | era O ro P C 3 f° Q T J CO 3 3 ^ & cn co rr s 8 P "> cr. 3 O T> 3 £ -5 o T) 3 a> era 3 p O. 3 ON 2 « B rt o C 3 J3 cr ?r 3. P o' 5' 2. 3 ^ era TJ cn 0_ N P_ J g s 3 ' I =1 tt 3 33 p S < CO cn P 3 CL a" co C P ^ cn CO 3 " 3 3 P co cr 3 < r^- CO o j " l-h 5' CO CD TJ CD CP 3 O » g 2 SL " co S « g 3 3". VS. 3 p CO ^ T J o g-vS" 2. O cn O ^ X . p n p co o ^ rt, i i O -t 3 ' •~H co ,5 -> era era co 5" <S. 3 ° P 3 — p Hi o 3 o £. 2 N E. £ g o 3= tt o o -1 v; TP • cn 3 " O T J I. S tt 0 ^ H vS K o 3 -tt p 3 cn era cr <E? 8 3 3 I cn O r-f p 3 " cn CD cn TT CD CD TJ CD CD "3 O CD ""*> H . 3 o o 3 era 3 -et 3 rt' 3 £r ' era cn c TJ o_ o' P 3 C L £. era O 3" •fl P 8 p sr § p 5-CD era 3 5-cf rt • f l tt O CD o. 00 o' CD ^ 3 ^ co' o " sr d 0 CO CD o era o 0 ' p rf cn CD T J cr1 p 3 C L 3 -o 3 CD •_. CL n s- •< 3 £_ VO 3 ' vo era ' o, o' p+itra Q tt <! S o o tt 5 -^ 0 3 3 3 -0 C L R- P n TJ H tt p* rt " 3 CD cn 3 v 3' era C L o o 3 a TJ Pf 3 a P 111 ^ o cr. rt' 3 o 3 3 P • rt > C L CT* CO CD P 5' 1 8 3 To 3. 5 3 •> — & CD CD 3" — . cn ^ 3 2. 3 . 3 CD" era P S CT C L g. S ? P cn CD CD 3 3 _ cn C L rt ° 55' era a 3 cn T) 0 2 3 ^ p CT P o tt CD § T J rt P O CD p O O era TJ 3 enci erati o 1 3 kno CD cn ion lation, wled lation, era r—t-cr an CO p loc C L 3 loc O C L tt O *L 3 CD SP 3 . cn O 3 P 3 C L cn cr p 5' era C L TJ C ? Si C P 2 o =p CD ^ P rt ^ cl 2 H 3 cr p P tt ^ CD 00 • f l tt -1 3" p P o y C= O o-< . CO CO P 0 cT 3 3 2. era £L ^ CD a < P P CD CD P - C L P -1 3 o O O O CD 3 " O 3 CD CO cn a 3 « CD on C \ 3 " H! i-H O CD 3 C L o tt 3 _ w , C L En' • 3 3 O O cT o ^ p < o CD 2. C L —• cn c^  % cn O O rf " ^ £• o w cl fi! cn TJ CD -3 V-V-p p- p 3 3 3 3 3 3 CD CO - ' 1 C L 3 p _rera o < tt CD C L O -1 P cn 3 o o < CD cr co' CD" cn . CD 3 O CT* hd £• 3 tt < cn 3 -h O 2 n O tt v< p n 3 n era •fl o 2 o O C L 3 tt CD on r-t-on CD cn Q era' o 3 O tn C L " P 3 tt w cn era £ PT J ^ 3 0 CD C L C P TJ O 3 " O "-<-. CO 3 ' < O P o 3 c 8 9 0 5 f S * CO m 3 era 3' CD CD —t 3' era § 3 co >fl •"• "I o S" rt' re O o 3 3 o p » 3 3 cn M r g5 2 >: = o ci S" s tt re o w H O z 5S w C/3 o z C/3 M d HH 2: H h-H 03 43 o on 03 43 r > on > Z o o o < z w z H o 43 43 I-H r> HH r on 74 2 3 p 3 sc o C L o • o o e ID o 5-S p 2 Z °' o o 3 "= rt 7 3 E -• e o ^ v : =rT3 0 cf o O o n 3 ft O O -JI O ft 2-© w C/3 H l-H O _ ^ ft rt rt. cn rt T 3 C T C 2 " 3 3- OQ ft 3 3 o o 3 < p ft o 3 0 ! a* 5 t/T w ^ p <^ I 3 o o c c « 3 C L 2. C. ft f 1 cn g O ft rt, rt rt p cr C= ft ><: p S' 3 3 C L cr < o' p U m 3 „ - • ^ n —• T 3 rt o 00 1/1 O CTQ ft O 2. SJ • = °- § 3 ft 3- cn 2 O ft 3 00 2 ft C/3 — & ^  -" C/j — ft 0 5? rt 5' ^ S- p ft •< -1 ? • rt o - a C L 2. ' o o 3. 5 00 P rt 3 £ R- g C L S & o Z U 2 ^ "* 0 E O rt - 3f EToo - z ~ 3 g C L c 5 e ^ it cn C O 00 O P C 3. ? N " ft C L o 3 P S. ~ o 00 ru  5cr ft ft r J ft cn S t? & B 3 - 3 ft ft ft O cn 5! ft S- rt I o =: S2 s 00 3 > o o < o P o 3 C 8 w a c w 3 00 JO O 2; t/3 o cn cr H 5 S 5 1 o 2. 2 0? 3 N 3 cn (1 * t3 co C L => 2 c» g 1 ft S ° 1 1 n o 3 C L pv 3 c O rt o rt. % ta — cr ftl 2 o 03 3 3- H cn cn O P5 3 O S ^ TO rt rt, 3 3 3 £ 5 2. ^ 5 c i cr rt ft rt <: 3 5 00 << S % P x 0 p 1 3-cn ft 00 td e O ~ 3 I p -3 o o c < rt n n o c 3 o to _y o' 3' ^ 3 O p fT 3 ; 3 3 P 3 -* 3. 3-rt rt ft ^ rt ^ c 3 o' -5' cn p O T3 rt ^ O P 3 O rt x n 3" cn P - 3 C L O O O = 3 " 3 B. 1 & o TP-S' 00 C L ft p cn P 3 C L < P R| to W 00 H C L C L P 2 3 3 cn M give rt give X rt 'hey give 3 'hey 3* 3 0 ro 2 P -1 3 n cn 03 cr 0 rt P 3 P cr ft cr ad of 3 P 3-3 rt is. 2 rt •5' £?_ | B cr o rt rt -1 3" rt T3 P 00 3 C L O o c T 3 br K rt « rt 3 T 3 3 rt o oo 0' 3 P C L P P T3 -. S. H & o p o 3* P 3 3 5' 00 -1 o c ft cn 2- 0 o " > C L < o o p O . c ^ cn 00 s 3 3 c ) C L " 0 C T cn n C L P O rt] rt 5 3 -1 < o 2 «= « 00 p XT 3 3 y P § F 3 2-5 ft 5' S 00 s rt' o o ft C L 3_ ft" C L O 2 3 2-rt p P o -a o cn o rt 3 O O rt C L P 3 *"* rt 3 3 rt g. C L O T= 3 rt p C T 3 P 3 ' p o < cr. 3 ^ O cn rt rt rt C L - cr * I l 3.' o S. 3 i 5 ~ p o 3 S I S- > > X n n P - -o a. 5' rt! cV C L P 00 =' 5 to C L p rt - cr P cn 3 a. ^ a < g c o -D. f) H z ^  * to ><: o O o o 3-Rl J - T 3 „ o o 2 • O ns S" 3 CL re 1 cr era tt K o p 3 tt ff tt 3 2 3 < •< -o ^ £ II 2. ^ CC to 2? w y tt o1 r» o O O 3 3 ON j n P 3" 5> 3 •-< 2 -< CD P 3 tt _ cn ^. 3 « o O OQ 3" cn -t o - g s> T3 o w C/3 H o z p ft) tt 3 CL P tt 2 o n OQ H H 2 =r 5 „ 0) ft T> "< O T3 cr c B. P sr 22. Tt O p tt p CL OQ ftJ 3 cn o ft P tt P o" 3 tt > p n P. -I 2 2 , Q > 5 2 o 2,-§ o o oo On c tt °> -a ? c <L cn O tt CD ft cr 3-. ^  ° 3 3 "•< 3. ft 3 cn OQ g g 8 " 5 5 ° 2 S. m n 3 0Q 3 CTQ 50 W czi O Z C/3 •a . p 2, 5 i Cu tt 0 1 3 CTQ 3 o Cu P P & 5' ° 5 ' tt 3 0Q o 3 -a 1 c -2 3 ^ tt cn ^ ft 3 3 ft P " 3 P tt cr cr P a . cn £ O t T O 1 " g cn ft X3 — X cn a T3 — P ft CL Ct o p ct Sj-6 o 0Q -Ct tt o s s 2 » 2 ? tt fS n o 3 3 3 P Ct a 0Q Q. § 3 on "O 3 2 c 3 ' ct tt 3 3 3 O 0Q tt P 3" •~ Ct p H o tt l-l ^ 3 p tt 3. 3 tt 5. r cnt-.pt, Cf 3 O P 3 ! ' » i-era era _ "3 3 i X. cn O p O 3 Ct 3 cn 3. cn 3 p 0Q cn 3 S- T> rt "3 < 3 3 sr n =! cn 2 5" 3.-a 3 -a 5 2 Ct 3 OQ 2, 3 3 - p ET Ct cf 3 O O 3T o Ct 3 a" • ft ^ 3 ft 3 p 3 Ct 0Q S n ' S 3 CT tt o' "< o g' o cr ° 3 E. 3 OQ ct 3 rt g p -a ' 1 cn 3' P P CD 3 OQ •a o o 2. § ct o 3 m s p » 3-tt 3^  P 0Q P 3 ff "a 3 p cn £ S rt' 3 ° O 3 p g 3 3 cn M 3' 3 o 5 1/1 •"*• rt- ST cn 3-tt ft n 5: " cn - ?r n cr. M 3 P 0Q O tt p " fD CT 3 ft CD 0Q era ct o T3 •a o p s;- 3-,0 ct ct era „ ct 3" " 2 3" 3 cn p P cn" S ° tt O . 3- p M ft CD H ^ o oo ct p •a 3 3 S •a B . ^ P r*- ^ 3 0 ^ tt 3. 8 rt Q tt ^ ^ H O 3" 2 o H rf 2. 31 ° tt ct H O cn ffi^ ^ cn" ttera 2. t-% cn O cn 1? -9 era 2 3 3 B S ' 5 n o - a P « 3 •fl o P 0Q < P tt 3 cr CD O CD O CD O o l —' K tt CD 3 rt 1 c? tt 3 Ct 2 5V 3 tt p cn 5. < 3 < CD g CD tt 5' 3 CD 0Q " eK cr CL o rT 2 Ct o H cr < ct ct cr ct p CT O O ~ rt\ < rt n 3" •» O cn P CT Ct cj. Cd ct O 3 o • CD . O P 3 < E 2 CD ^ 2 CD 1- P cn CL O —h 3 tt P O ft o 3' i ^ 0 5 t3 P 3 3. 3 o-3 O p *-< . v> cn O ^ O tt 3 3 < era tt O o _. P cn cr tt sr $ 2 tt o P • cn ft ft JT o tt C T 2 Ct O H 2 < ct o' era o 3 3. 3 p T3 cr p cn O SJ E. s o. re .H CL rt =' rt 13 3 p CT g> rt 9 o | 8 n U O 3 3 00 p 3 CO rt cn 5^ cn 00 n. o oo r-3 c* 3 7 3 £ rv cn rt o a w C/3 H O 25 13 rt O 3 3 8 | ° g cr ' i rt 65 13 rt c 3 o 3 3- rt « 3 CL ~ cn 3* C _ p rt K 2 ^ 3" 13 v: p rt • 13 3 . j " 0 3' 3^ 3 00 rt 00 _- 3 o" 00 3 3' ^ a ^ rt CT" 3. C 3 ~ 00 ° < < rt * 3 - 2 rt s. o 3 00 ST rt o <: rt 3 cn O cn i ' w i rt 3" • f fS 00 3-cn n p << rt "O rt cn rt rt rt 3" t> rt rti -rt" o 13 cn rtj rt 3 rt ' , 3 H rt rt c. 3^ ET 3 p CL 2 -Q C rt § g 8 « S 0 a c. 3 °rt 5' rt rt w 03 o Z 3 o o rt rt CL O cn ^ 5' P < s-P o 3' sr > IT. >< cn ' CL rt "a ° 3- n B- o & rt O P cr 3 cr E *<" 3 rt 3 3 £ 13 rt rt rt 3 3: <E. < £? S rt rt 3 cn cn g CL p O m ~ " O rt I rf P, rt13 O 3 13 P 3 CL o 2 a 3" 3 CL rth " Cf rt3 3 O < O P o rt CL g « a 3 o s-n o e 3 O rt H 3 3-rt ro o <^ 3" 3-8 I cn 13 rt • cn ; S rt o <" o £L — 3- * rt L. P rt 3 3 cn M rt D. 00 3 I-1-1 rt 3 3 00 rt o P 3 cr rt 3" rt 0 •< cn 0 cn rt -an 3 00 CL cn cr cn en rt rt-3? rt cn O cn P O rt rt 00 P 13 O "-1 ' ^ 5' O Z a-3 o c 3- c< P J5-™ 3 p o o o 3 rt S p rt-CL O °- O r ? § a. « n> P cn >< O O P E- o =5 CL —• p 3 cn 00 O cn O rt CT" rt o n 3 3 O ^ ^ g a. rt rt o CL rt 3 O o 13 5" * 3- g "2. rt" rt 3- rt p p -i 3" 3- P rt 2 « cl ° 3 •< "-00 CL € 2. 3-3 rt 00 S-_.. rt r^  §• I ° rt ctf « a s n sr P 5 rt C rt o cn -. < rt 3 g >< 3 O ~ 3 3* a n rt P p —. rt CT" 13 O C 3 H 3 2: < £ . cn 5' 3' cn o 00 3" 2 <Ti p^  rt rt O 3 rt rt O a 3 % o o - 1 3 P 3 CL P 13 o td o rt n <. 31 n 3 a n rt cn <T cr ^ p 3 3; cn rt rt rt. p p rt 1—. tn rt O rt rt — rt rt cn 3- cn S O 3" O " 3 a. oo rt 0 -rt cr ^ 2 o CL < '< 5' 2, r> n — P cn rt CT* cn O cn' o P rt rt 0O S£ 3- U „ rt' rt 5 N rt O rt rt P o' 3 O rt o rt 3 rt a P CL 33 rt 3 3* in rt 3 rt S. 3. rt cn 2. s-cn P CL rt- CL rtH rt 3^ 2 rt O rt, 3 13 rt P rt rt rt a 3-31 rt p co 00 S. 3-P 2 _: O SJ E . ST 3 CL rt o 3 CD cn rO c CD cn o e CD cn o c CD o 3 CD cn o e CD cn O 3 ON o 3 O 3 O 3 O 3 O 3 O tn 3 O CD co s s: CO CD cr. 3 cl BH cn CD C L CD S a ^ «• 9 3 CD CD 3 CD < Cd ^ > W =? °? p < 3 P r, cn O 3' nr? era CD HH C -w cr cro' cr Co i—h cr CD 3 o cn (rt CD O 3 Co cn CD. cT < CO 3 Co cn cc — . CD &• 'I 2 <T 3 13 C HI i-h CD 2 CD C L 3 cr 3 CD CD <» CD r - r O cr cr. 3 < CD era HI o c ••a cn CO H o o 0 1 CD 1 3 a CD 3 CD Cf. C 2 CD" 5- P -£ CD <• 3 CD CO O O O 3 3 O CD CD 3 « 3 C L CD 3 CD 1 3 3 3 S 3 CD 3. H K 0 0 O 2 f° CD 3 — CL <H-H L co S cl & 2 -CD CD 3 i f 2- o & <"•> H i ' CO o 3 2- C L *< 3 CO CD cn CD (V c . CD 3 a. era rt- cn s: co cn cn g O S 3 o' § § cn CD _. era 3 3 3 O rt. o h3' & 3 CD ^ 3 Co s: s-O CD o cd ° 3 3 cn g en rt-' °> CT 3 CD CD CD CD 1 3 " < i ' g o 3 cl 3 3: 3 CD 3. o P o O 3 O o 3 3 3 3^  o' P » r t o' 3 a P o 3" CD < CD H i CD 13 H i CD cn CD 3 P <' CD P frt CD Cu 2. H i ' H | 2. Et o' 3 cn cr l3' o "< o cT P C L < o o p o era H i o 3 1 3 cn O o a P ' 3 W CD £ o 3 CD C L cr CD -cl O c2 3 § CD Ct 3 P < CD O 3 CD 1 / 3 C L cn cr P CD H- C L O o 3 * § _. Cd O o 5" 3 cr & o cr o cT P C L < o o _ &° n ° 3 ^ 3 era CD H ; 3 3 C L Cd cr W H- H CO 3 3 2 Cu 3 O 5' '< 3 O CD 31 C L ,3 cr era ^ < Cd L / I ? < 3 n 3 CD C L cr o o o o o 3 3 3 3 3 CD CD CD CD CD CD S 78 O c CD cn o c CD cn o c CD o 3 VO O 3 O 3 3 2 CD 1 13 CD tr1 " 3 3 CD ^ 3 CD O 3 era S - CD » " « cn to O fir. «< CD ^ „ a CD r^- cn cn 3 " cn w 2. tT r-t- CD 3.' CD !^ o C cn cn H 5' ^ 3 3 o era I - 3 •~< cn CJ" tt' D o O 3 era 3 cn O 3 N ' CD CL o 3 tt N CD C L H ffl d ^ ° o 3" era tt o 3 CO Ml p CD 3 -CL rt 13 cn CD '< o CO 3 P i>. CD, T 7 < CD cn r-^  f» t—t CD Sera s ^ CL cn CD 1 - 1 rt CD 3 C L CD o cc i-t 2- ° 3 " 3 o T3 ST1 CD O o 3 CD —t CD 13 i-i CD Cn ^ § § cn Co 13 - • O < 3-CD K cn tt cn Q ' co 3 CD 13 C L O o o CD CO CL < o o o era o 3 13 era CD 3 CD co CD CO 3 A P P E N D I X 5 M O T H S T A K E H O L D E R L I S T • Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks; Planning and Conservation Services,; visitor Services, Parks; Environmental Protection Branch • Ministry of Tourism • Ministry of Attorney General, Motor Vehicle Branch • Ministry of Municipal Affairs, recreation and Housing • Ministry of Health • B C Ferries • B C Transit • Alberta Ministry of Transportation and Utilities • Ontario Ministry of transportation • Bicycl ing Association of B C • Greater Victoria Cycl ing Coalition • Outdoor Recreation Council • The Islands Trust • I C B C Traffic Safety Education Branch • Professional Engineers of B C Municipal Division • B C Trucking Association • Youth Hostel Association • Western Motor Coach/Operators Association • B C Taxi Association • B C Couriers Associations • R C M P • Union of British Columbia Municipalities • Greater Vancouver Regional District Transport 2021 Project • Capital Regional District Transportation Strategy Project • Individual municipalities • Regional districts of Central Okanagan, Fraser-Fort George, Kootenay-Boundary, and Thompson-Nicola 80 APPENDIX 6 A PERSPECTIVE ON VANCOUVER TRANSPORTATION Councillor Gordon Price offered an eloquent summary of the history of the transportation planning in Vancouver. The following except from his interview describes the steps that lead to attention turning to bicycle transportation planning. Until very recently it was technical process driven by engineering standards. Commitment to the automobile began in about 1915. The [layout] of North American cites were driven by the technology of the streetcar and the real estate speculation that went along with it. These systems were put into place fairly quickly because they were great machines for creating value in land. People were restricted by how far they could walk. Cities had to be very compact because transportation options were so limited and typically people would live close to where they worked. The street car was revolutionary because it gave the average person access to a suburban housing form. Neighborhoods like Kitsilano, Mount Pleasant, Grandview, even the West End were all streetcar neighborhoods. It could have gone on and on forever if it hadn't been for the arrival of the car. So rather than being restricted to just [areas served by] the streetcar line, now you could go anywhere land became cheaper. The single-family house and separated land use was now all possible. The initial standards on how to do all that were developed in the 1920s by Bartholomew, who did the city plan in 1928 in Vancouver. [Bartholomew] is one of those key planners who really figured out how to design the city around the car through a grid of arterial automobile boulevards. He did the plan in 1923 in L A and it still effectively exists today. Not surprisingly it was the same types of principles I said had to be applied to the bicycle. Y o u had an interconnected series of streets that where fairly easy to understand, had fairly high capacity, and would get you to almost any destination. It is a very powerful system. And that is essentially what the Bartholomew plan is all about. So the engineers had been using this plan, even though it had never been approved by council, right through until the 1980s. Councils were perfectly happy to go along with it, because one thing for sure the politicians knew is that people love cars and they were the economic engines of society. It's been argued the automobile is the economy when you add in energy, production, maintenance, distribution, sales, etc. The next stage after that were the freeways. The most important thing that never happened to Vancouver was the building of the freeways. It was the next stage of automobile construction. Vancouver's refusal to build that system (inability to do so really because it certainly wanted to, but it didn't have the money), and its constraint by water are some of the reasons why you have mixed land use. Why you have this incredibly complex, quite European city. Why, in short, you have a city who's transportation system really hasn't changed, fundamentally, since the 1920s. Still the street car neighborhoods. Simply because we didn't build the freeways. By the 1980s we were doing everything to try to squeeze as many cars in as possible until finally it became apparent nothing was working. I think it was at that point council began to think seriously about finding alternative solutions. We don't have the money, political will is not there, the neighborhoods will fight you every step of the way, and we still have to provide access. Where the revolutionary thinking occurred was a recognition that actually no transportation solution is going to work in the absence of a good land use policy. The development of the Livable Region Strategic Plan in the 1970s regarded that kind of concept and the [provided] opportunities to do this. Y o u finally see enough of the alternatives coming together. Despite how cynical the skeptical people were, they could finally see the results beginning to happen. I think we are at that stage now. (Gordon Price, pc June 3, 1999) 81 APPENDIX 7 PENDER STREET BIKE LANES Unexpectedly, during the week of M a y 24£ , 1999, after years of lobbying by the cycling community and continual delay by the city, the City of Vancouver announced a plan to put a bike lane along Pender Street, a crucial link in a future bike lane network in downtown Vancouver. A n open house was held on M a y 26 t h , 1999 to discuss the proposal and receive public input. The B E S T listserve exploded with urgent rallying calls to ensure strong support by the cycling community at the open house. On June 1 the proposals went to council where matters where complicated when a local architect presented a grand vision of a boulevard, a vision he felt the city should build along Pender street. The council sent the proposals back for further study and finally voted on the original bike lane proposal on June 22. The city's Pender street bike lane proposal took the cycling community be surprise, a surprise most embraced, although some with frustration... "After seeing the thing last night [Pender St bike lane meeting] having that just come out of no where. Why, after all this time of hearing from us that bike lanes downtown are what we need? A l l we heard was, 'no we can't do it, wait for the downtown transportation plan' As soon as we started talking about downtown and bike lanes downtown it was, 'oh well the city of Vancouver transportation plan doesn't apply to downtown'. 'The needs of the downtown are special and it has to have it's own plan'. Okay, when does that process start? 'Well we're not sure'. It's just this on going stalling. That, on the one hand, is how policy works. On the other hand, you have this situation that we saw last night where out of no where comes the announcement, 'yeah we're putting bike lanes downtown'. A bunch of us have been pushing for 5, 7 years for them to put a bike lane in somewhere, anywhere downtown. 'No, no, well it's not part of the plan, it has to be this, we have to wait for the downtown transportation plan'. And then they just go ahead, throw an open house. We all got notice of the open house at the same time - and it's all about putting bike lanes in downtown. And it's like, 'well excuse me, I thought we had to wait for the plan?' So I don't understand how [the policy process] works. Here's my perspective of what happened there; They're ripping up that length of street anyway.. .1 had this discussion with Doug Louie while he was planning the 'Puil Parkway'. When I first caught wind of that I phoned up Doug and I said, what's going on, how can you guys be talking about putting in another road, increasing capacity. The very first principle in the Vancouver Transportation plan is no increase in capacity. I said, why are you working on this, why aren't you working on bike lanes, I thought you were supposed to be doing this progressive engineering, doing all this great stuff for cyclists? 'Oh well, it's part of the neighborhood and that's what I work on is neighborhood transportation. This has been a long standing area of concern.' That's all crap, it's basically a selective group of residents, including George Puil, who don't like the buses coming by their front door. So once I figured that out, had done a little bit more research to see where this whole nonsense was coming from, I knew I had Doug. This should not be going on. They hadn't even consulted the residents at First and Fir that this was going on. They were hoping to get this on paper [approved by council] before they had even consulted the residents. To be fair, I don't think it was Doug's idea to put this road through there. I rounded up opposition to the road and we went into city council. City council had heard by the time we showed up there. We did a quite effective campaign down in that area, informing people as to what was going on. So council had a stack of faxes and there were people lined up chomping at the bit. 82 [Council] came out and deferred so they could talk about the dedicated fire protection system, where they are ripping up Pender. It gave Gordon Price the opportunity to stand up and say, 'as long as we are ripping up the street why don't we do something nice like put in some more benches or trees or whatever'. I think Doug Louie, who was there, thought maybe we can atone for our sins. That's just my guess. I don't know how to verify it other than asking these guys themselves. Gordon Price gave a long speech about Vancouver's not in the business of building roads, etc. When it came time [for the engineers] to think about what else to do, 'well council seems to be giving us the go ahead to do something nice on this section of the street, we just heard an ear full about traffic, it's being driven by the alternative transportation community, we know these guys want bike lanes'. After what happened at Vanier park, which was the first time since the draft transportation plan I had tried to round up people, I'm thinking of turning it into an annual event, go in there and harass city hall. I think that is really what they need, to be slammed every time they are going to do something foolish, they need to be reminded, 'no this is not what we do anymore'." (Scott Nelson) Alternatively, Doug Louie from the City Neighborhood Transportation Branch gave his take on the events leading up to the proposed bike lanes on Pender St. "It's the result of many things. There's the B S W G , there's the Burrard bike lanes, there's the transportation plan that asked for bike lanes in the downtown. We thought about it, we thought Burrard might be one, perhaps Pacific. I've heard a lot from the cyclists that they want something downtown and downtown makes sense to us. So the policy is there, the advocacy is there, and in this case the opportunity was there. So there's where staff plays an important role. We found that this thing was happening [the reconstruction of Pender between Carrall and Hamilton, there's an opportunity, seize the opportunity. And that's generally how it came about. It wasn't one that happened over night. Like I said, that goes to the Adanac bike lane in 1992. There was a desire at the same time to connect into the downtown. I think the bike groups back then realized, well we can't, we're lucky to get the bikeway, because it was the first one, to go into the downtown and to construct further was problematic. I can tell you the agony that both the advisory committee and staff went through to negotiate what the Adanac bikeway would look and feel like, it was like pulling teeth. Now it's like, 'oh yeah we'll get another bike lane'. The first one is always the most difficult. [The Pender St. bike lane] went back to the days of the Adanac. Someone asked, 'well we should have a connection to downtown'. A l l we could do at that time was to connect it with the existing Seaside bike route so it wouldn't dangle. Pender is going to dangle but you cannot neglect the fact it is a once in a ten year opportunity. If we didn't do it [now] we would never do it for years to come. It's now or never. It helps the future because you can say, oh well doesn't it make sense to continue this west? Yes it does. How are we going to do this? That's going to be the next challenge because the road narrows quite a bit. If you go east or west [the road] narrows down considerably. There is no way we can put in a bike lane without doing something drastic to car traffic or parking, so that's a big challenge." Appendix 8 contains the official description of the events of the Pender street bike lane proposal as written in the Administrative Report of July 15, 1999. 83 APPENDIX 8 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT OF JULY 15,1999 Below is the complete text of the City of Vancouver's Administrative Report of July 15, 1999 and the introduction that accompanied the report. "On M a y 26, 1999 we hosted an Open House to seek feedback on a design for Pender Street. Thirty people signed-in and many others stopped by to look at the plans. The general response was consistent with our consultations with the various stakeholders prior the Open House -general support for the project overall with strong support for improved cycling facilities and the creation of a Greenway/Public Way on this section of Pender Street. City Council discussed this matter on June 1st. Council requested that staff report back in three weeks time with several alternative options that would create treed medians on this part of Pender Street. The new options include the following: 1. O R I G I N A L D E S I G N - M O D I F I E D - This is similar to the design presented at the Open House with the addition of a central median between Carrall and Abbott Streets. This is achieved by removing four parking spaces. 2. B I K E L A N E B O U N D E D B Y T R E E D M E D I A N - This design includes a 2.0 m wide planted median to separate a 2.0 m wide bike lane from four general traffic lanes, providing a more protected bike lane and allowing for more trees. 3. D O U B L E M E D I A N S E P A R A T I N G T R A F F I C - This design inserts two treed medians between four traffic lanes with the potential to create two "bus-only" lanes. 4. L A R G E C E N T R A L M E D I A N - This design might allow vehicle parking or pedestrian open space in a large central median with two rows of trees. A l l of the above designs include bike lanes. The new alternatives wi l l be presented at the following public Open House: Monday, June 21, 1999 at 7:30 P M S U C C E S S offices, Room 108, 28 West Pender Street These options, together with public feedback, w i l l be presented for Council's consideration (at the meeting of the Standing Committee of Council on Transportation and Traffic) on Tuesday, June 22, 1999" 84 / A D M I N I S T R A T I V E R E P O R T Date: July 15, 1999 Author/Local: J im Hall/7130 R T S No. 878 C C File No. 5757 T & T Date: July 20, 1999 T O : Standing Committee of Transportation and Traffic F R O M : General Manager of Engineering Services S U B J E C T : Bike Lanes on Pender Street, West of Cambie Street R E C O M M E N D A T I O N A . T H A T the proposed bike lanes on Pender Street, west of Cambie Street be deferred until further analysis and consultation has been undertaken, at which time staff would report back to Council . However, i f Council wishes to proceed at this time, then either Consideration B1 or B 2 should be approved, along with Recommendations C, D and E . C O N S I D E R A T I O N B l . T H A T Pender Street between Cambie and Burrard Streets be delineated as described in Option " B l " of this report (with exclusive bicycle lanes added and one lane of general traffic removed between Seymour and Cambie Streets). OR B2 . T H A T Pender Street between Cambie and Burrard Streets be delineated as described in Option "B2" of this report (with one hybrid bus-bicycle lane and one general traffic lane in each direction between Seymour and Cambie Streets). R E C O M M E N D A T I O N C. T H A T funding of $75,000 for the implementation of these bike lanes be provided from Streets Capital Unappropriated Account 30000130, Bicycle Network. D . T H A T following a trial period of about six months after installation, further public consultation be undertaken about the trial bike lanes for report back to Council . E . T H A T the options for bike lanes on Pender Street west of Burrard Street be subject to further public input as an early part of the Downtown Transportation Plan. G E N E R A L M A N A G E R O F E N G I N E E R I N G S E R V I C E S ' C O M M E N T S : Although Council has indicated an interest to create bike lanes in the Downtown, the General Manger of Engineering Services is concerned that there has not been sufficient time to perform the needed detailed analysis and public consultation on this important issue. The recent resurfacing of Pender Street did not affect the curbs, so there is no opportunity lost by deferring 85 the decision while these issues are addressed. Accordingly, I recommend " A " , that the decision be deferred at this time. However, i f Council wishes to proceed at this time, I would prefer Option "B2" on the basis of general traffic capacity, safety, and transit benefit, along with motions C, D and E . C I T Y M A N A G E R ' S C O M M E N T S The City Manager R E C O M M E N D S A , which would ensure Council has the benefit of the full public consultation results and detailed analysis prior to making a decision on the bike lane options. C O U N C I L P O L I C Y The 1997 Transportation Plan emphasizes the need to provide more comfortable cycling and walking environments. The Vancouver Comprehensive Bicycle Plan (1988) and the Clouds of Change Report (1990) established the City's policy of promoting and encouraging cycling as a transportation alternative. P U R P O S E The purpose of this report is to present two options for a trial of bike lanes on Pender Street between Cambie and Burrard Streets. This section of street is to be resurfaced and restriped after the Dedicated Fire Protection System is constructed this summer. A decision on this section of the Pender Street bike lanes could take advantage of this need to restripe the roadway between the existing curbs. Proposals for the extension of the bike lanes west of Burrard Street would be reported back following further public consultation. B A C K G R O U N D The City of Vancouver Transportation Plan, Comprehensive Bicycle Plan and Clouds of Change Report encourage cycling as a transportation alternative. The City has implemented over 100 kilometres of bikeways throughout the City; however few facilities have been provided in the Downtown area. On June 22, 1999, bike lanes were approved on Pender Street between Carrall and Cambie Streets as part of a redevelopment, and Council asked for an indication of how these could be extended westward. Because Pender Street is currently being excavated for the Dedicated Fire Protection System and wi l l be restored over the summer, changes to the roadway configuration could be implemented now, rather than waiting until 2001 for completion of the Downtown Transportation Plan. E X I S T I N G P L A N S The City of Vancouver Bicycle Advisory Committee has a network sub-committee which advises on future bicycle routes in the City. This sub-committee has been looking at bicycle routes in the Downtown and has identified Pender Street as a high priority corridor. Pender Street provides an extension into the Downtown from the Adanac Bikeway to the east. The Downtown Vancouver Association has developed a Downtown Transportation Plan with selection criteria and performance standards for bicycle routes (see Appendix "D"), which also indicates this portion of Pender Street as a bicycle route. 86 P U B L I C C O N S U L T A T I O N In the short time-frame to conduct this process, public consultation was limited and responses are still being received at time of writing. A n Open House to solicit public comment on this proposal was held on July 5, 1999. In addition to a proposal ( B l ) for Pender Street between Cambie and Burrard Streets, two proposals were presented to deal with bike lanes on Pender Street west of Burrard Street. Generally participants supported Option " B l " between Cambie and Burrard Streets as presented at the Open House. Comments are included in Appendix " E " . A suggestion was subsequently received to create bus-bicycle hybrid curb lanes on the section of Pender Street between Cambie and Seymour Streets (B2). This is the narrowest section (12.5 metres versus about 14.6 metres west of Granville Street) and creates the greatest challenge for introducing bike lanes. Upon submission of this report, further discussions are underway with representatives of the Downtown Vancouver Association, Downtown Business Improvement Association, and TransLink. As well , participants who attended the Open House were subsequently asked for their comments on the proposal for hybrid bus-bicycle lanes. Comments from these stakeholders wi l l be presented at the Committee meeting. Some business representatives have expressed concern over the reduced roadway capacity. D I S C U S S I O N Regarding the route in general, it is consistent with the Bicycle Network Sub-committee priorities. It is also included in the Downtown Vancouver Association's Downtown Transportation Plan (map, Appendix D). Pender Street has two travel lanes in each direction, generally no parking anytime and no stopping during rush periods. With buses and other vehicles stopping in the curb lanes, the capacity of this section of Pender Street is often limited to one lane in each direction. At present, Pender Street between Cambie and Seymour Streets carries at most about: • 700 vehicles per hour each direction in the morning peak period; • 400 vehicles per hour westbound in the afternoon peak period; and • 1,000 vehicles per hour eastbound in the afternoon peak period. Bus volumes are: • 74 per hour westbound in the morning peak period; • 65 per hour westbound in the afternoon peak period; and • 60 per hour eastbound in the peak periods. Pender Street is wider west of Seymour Street (about 14.6 metres) than east of Seymour Street (about 12.5 metres). For the narrower section between Cambie and Seymour Streets, two options are proposed. Option " B l " provides eastbound and westbound bike lanes within the existing curbed roadway by eliminating a westbound travel lane. Option "B2" provides eastbound and westbound bus-bicycle hybrid lanes by excluding general traffic from the curb lanes. Removal of a general traffic lane wi l l reduce the capacity of the street. Detailed analysis of this impact on the surrounding roadway system could not be conducted within the time available. However, some discussion of impacts and details on the proposals is contained in Appendices " A " , " B " and " C " . 87 F I N A N C I A L I M P L I C A T I O N S A n estimated funding of $75,000 is required for this project. The Provincial Cycl ing Network Program recently approved a grant to the City of Vancouver of about $350,000 for the Mosaic, Lakewood and Burrardview bikeways. This provides additional funding for this project, which is available from Streets Capital Unappropriated Account 30000130, Bicycle Network. C O N C L U S I O N The resurfacing of Pender Street due to the construction of the Dedicated Fire Protection System provides an opportunity to add bike lanes on Pender Street between Cambie and Burrard Streets. Two Options are presented for Council's consideration. However, due to the limited time for detailed analysis and public consultation, the decision on bike lanes on Pender Street should be deferred until this analysis and consultation has been undertaken, at which time staff would report back to Council . This would allow further development of other options that may be more pedestrian friendly (i.e. trees, wider sidewalks). 88 APPENDIX 9 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES INTERVIEW Interview from Transportation Alternatives Magazine, May/June 1999, available online at http://www.transalt.org/features/interviews/wandres.html "While on staff at the NYC Department of City Planning (DCP), Transportation Division Project Manager Jackson Wandres spearheaded the agency's creation of the Citywide Bicycle Master Plan, the New York Cycling Map and the 1999 Bicycle User Surveys and other key studies. As he prepares to leave the agency, he took some time to fill us in on the state of planning for cyclists in NYC. Jackson, both a bike commuter and a category three racer, is that rare combination of avid cyclist and a skilled planner. His contribution at the Department of City Planning will be missed by the bicycling community. What accomplishments during your two year tenure at DCP make you most proud? The widespread distribution of the cycling maps. The work I did to raise awareness for cyclists' issues at higher levels, especially helping to win additional Federal funding for new projects and making sure that funded projects were designed and constructed to the highest standards possible. What did you expect to happen that hasn't? I thought more bicycle lanes would have been installed. What happened that surprised you ? I never thought I would see Joe Rose [the Commissioner of the Department of City Planning] on network television saying that in ten years you wi l l be able to ride your bike around the perimeter of Manhattan. The City has said that it has a goal of institutionalizing bike and pedestrian planning. How would you say it's going? They have made a lot of progress, but still have a long way to go. Too often bicycle projects are viewed from a safety point of view. Bicycl ing projects should be viewed more from an ecological and quality of life point of view. What are the top three things that the City should do to help cyclists? The City needs to make a serious commitment to constructing the entire bike network and start enforcing laws to protect cyclists. The City needs to demonstrate that it recognizes the benefits of cycling and visibly and publicly encourages it. The City also needs to enforce the 89 Vehicle and Traffic Law equitably for all transportation modes — motor vehicles and bicycles alike. What are three "realistic" things the City could do to help cyclists in next five years? What can happen in the next five years is influenced more by political wi l l than anything else. The political climate for bicycling as it currently exists is discouraging. The City could easily implement major portions of the bicycle network. High priority bike lanes should be implemented where needed most. But this is tricky to do because to make room you have to pit bikes against cars. If bicycle lanes aren't appropriated, then traffic-calmed routes can be created, speeds reduced and enforcement increased. The City currently shows a lack of w i l l but, i f they chose to, resources could be allocated, deadlines could be set, etc. Bike parking could be institutionalized in new developments. Through work with zoning resolutions, this could happen. Joe Rose gave a long speech about the need to make substantial revisions to the zoning resolutions, so D C P is thinking along those lines. It needs to make sure a requirement to provide bike parking is part of those revisions. As an everyday cyclist over the years what changes have you noticed? It feels like more people are riding bikes for commuting reasons. People seem more prepared and deliberate. Cyclists have evolved. More take it seriously and have taught themselves to be good at it. People that the current administration would consider to be average or "mainstream" people have discovered the advantages of cycling to work. Ten to fifteen years ago you saw people that could be considered eccentric people riding around. In a city that has done next to nothing to encourage and promote cycling over the past 20 years, to see that change occur naturally over time despite conditions that have remained static or declined is a good reason to promote cycling even further. How much of the hold up for bike stuff is money related? None at all. Money is rarely the issue. There is money available for whatever the City decides to build. Cycl ing infrastructure has to be deemed worth the expenditure of resources. Government bureaucrats assume that people who want bike facilities make up a small percent of the population, so it is deemed an ineffective, inefficient use of politicians' and bureaucrats' time to address those issues. If you demonstrate a great safety benefit, people in power are more likely to respond. 90 The Mayor has said, "We don't need planning." Is he right? Yes and no. Many things get planned unnecessarily. Projects get unnecessarily delayed because there is a fear of doing the wrong thing. This bureaucratic fear is crippling because meaningful steps forward require taking risks. There are often common sense solutions that simply need to be implemented. The City is erring on the side of conservatism. For example, the City 's stand on Prospect Park is a weak one. The City is unwilling to test out new ideas, even in places where they are so obviously right. What is your advice to TA. ? It appears that T . A . and the city agencies with which they deal find themselves as opponents. This causes name-calling like the cartoons in the T . A . magazine (see T . A . , Jan/Feb 1999, pg. 8). I understand the criticisms, but what ends up happening is that the gap grows bigger. More constructive criticism wi l l create a much more productive working relationship. Name-calling really does piss people off. T . A . needs to reserve that kind of criticism for when a really horrendous offense has been clearly demonstrated. B y the same token, people in the City government are too thin-skinned. Unfortunately, people take bad reviews personally and cop an attitude, revealing an inability to take the heat. Both sides need to make an effort to work together. Also , the magazine has the tone of disapproval - yes, I agree that the higher-ranking bureaucrats need to do more. But the magazine should do more to acknowledge that the people in the middle are trying their best." 91 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0089112/manifest

Comment

Related Items