Esplanade Complete Street

Share Esplanade Complete Street on Facebook Share Esplanade Complete Street on Twitter Share Esplanade Complete Street on Linkedin Email Esplanade Complete Street link

Consultation has concluded

Update: December 19, 2023

The Esplanade Complete Street improvements are now complete between Forbes Avenue and 3rd Street and along Esplanade to St Andrews Avenue. Visit our project webpage for details.

Update: October 18, 2021

Construction is underway. Visit our project webpage for details.

Update: May 17, 2021

Thank you for your interest in the Esplanade Complete Street project. Our Phase 2 public engagement period has closed and we’re reviewing all the input we received from stakeholders and the community. We’ll be presenting a summary of engagement feedback and the finalized design to Council before advancing to construction this summer.

Phase 2 - April 2021

Last November, we reached out to the community about our plans to redesign Esplanade to provide a safer and more comfortable experience for everyone. We heard from many of you about how you experience Esplanade, what’s important to you and what would make it better. Throughout this preliminary engagement process, safety was identified as the single most important issue to be addressed when reimagining the corridor.

Over the last few months, we’ve developed a design for Esplanade based on the project principles, community and stakeholder feedback and guidance from Council-approved policy, including our Safe Mobility Strategy. The outcome is a design that supports people of all ages and abilities, and achieves our design goals of:

  • Creating a safer, more comfortable experience for pedestrians and cyclists
  • Maintaining the existing road capacity for transit, trucks and passenger vehicles
  • Providing good access to local businesses
  • Creating a street that feels vibrant and welcoming


View the Design

The complete corridor design and renderings are available below. We've also summarized feedback from Phase 1 into seven themes. Under each theme, we’ve identified what we heard from you and how that feedback has been reflected in the design. We welcome your questions and comments.

[ Click image to view the full corridor and detailed design changes ]

What We Heard: 

  • Sidewalks are narrow and often cluttered
  • Seating areas are limited
  • Sidewalks are dark and unwelcoming
  • Driveways are points of conflict with drivers
  • Creating more green space would make the street more enjoyable to visit


How We Are Responding:

  • Creating wider sidewalks and relocating obstructions
  • Adding more accessible seating to provide places to rest or socialize
  • Adding pedestrian scale lighting
  • Creating safer driveway crossings by raising these areas to sidewalk height
  • Planting more trees to create separation between people moving at different speeds
  • Providing opportunities for businesses to create more attractive spaces for people to spend time

View of Esplanade looking west towards the Chesterfield intersection

1. Trees to be planted will provide shade and be more suited to an urban environment
2. New pedestrian scale lighting will contribute to a more vibrant and safe sidewalk
3. Planted medians provide space for seating under the urban tree canopy
4. Planted boulevards provide soft separation between mobility lanes and sidewalks
5. Wide boulevards have space for benches, bike racks, and street furniture, keeping the sidewalk clutter-free

What We Heard: 

  • Crossing the street is uncomfortable due to traffic speed and volume
  • Intersections can be dangerous points of conflict for cyclists


How We Are Responding:

  • Creating larger waiting areas at intersections to give people more space
  • Installing advanced walk signals at intersections that give people more time to cross the street before vehicles start moving
  • Installing accessible pedestrian crossing signals where they are currently absent
  • Tightening the corners at intersections so drivers must slow down when turning
  • Introducing a protected intersection design at Chesterfield

A protected intersection design will provide safer space for people, pedestrians and cyclists to cross the street, while also slowing down vehicles turning the corners [CLICK TO ENLARGE]

What We Heard: 

  • Cyclists feel unsafe riding in unprotected mobility lanes
  • Drivers feel uncomfortable beside cyclists in unprotected mobility lanes
  • People riding bicycles on the sidewalk create conflicts with people walking, rolling, and accessing shops


How We Are Responding:

  • Separating mobility lanes from vehicles, parked cars, and sidewalks
  • Creating safe passing space within the mobility lanes to accommodate different travel speeds
  • Improving connections to the broader Mobility Lane Network
  • Improving the existing separated lanes to reduce conflicts and improve accessibility

View of Esplanade looking east from Rogers Overpass

1. Physical separation between sidewalks, mobility lanes, and vehicles is achieved by reallocating space for parked vehicles
2. Planted boulevards provide soft separation between mobility lanes and sidewalks
3. Wider sidewalks provide opportunities for patios or other social spaces that do not impede pedestrians
4. High visibility pavement markings highlight areas where drivers cross over mobility lanes to access Esplanade

What We Heard:

  • Speeding is a significant safety concern for all road users
  • Excessive noise from speeding impacts the overall enjoyment of Esplanade
  • Cyclists riding too quickly on the sidewalk creates conflict with pedestrians


How We Are Responding:

  • Designing the street to support safe speeds appropriate for an urban street

View of Esplanade looking west from the Lonsdale intersection

1. Narrowed lanes support safe vehicle operating speeds and provide space for protected mobility lanes
2. Trees and other plants provide soft separation between people moving at different speeds
3. Curb buffers provide separation between mobility lanes and vehicles

What We Heard:

  • Maintaining frequent and reliable transit is important to transit riders and TransLink
  • Accessibility at bus stops could be improved


How We Are Responding:

  • Improving accessibility at existing transit stops
  • Designing bus stops to reduce conflicts between the sidewalk, mobility lanes, and bus stop areas

View of the bus stop area between Rogers Ave and Chesterfield Ave

1. Large waiting areas provide space for people waiting to cross the street
2. Bus stop accessibility upgrades aligned with RapidBus stop improvements
3. Bus stop designed to minimize conflicts between mobility lane users and transit riders
4. Accessible crossings allow for people to easily roll across the mobility lane when accessing the sidewalk or bus stop
5. Planted boulevards help with storm water management and provide greater separation from moving vehicles
6. Mobility lane narrows near crossing areas to slow cyclists

What We Heard:

  • Maintaining access to industrial areas and the Port of Vancouver is critical
  • Drivers are concerned about increased traffic and congestion


How We Are Responding:

  • Maintaining two vehicle lanes in each direction on Esplanade
  • Adding left turn lanes at St Georges to improve intersection safety and traffic flow around vehicles waiting to turn left
  • Coordinating signal timing to keep traffic moving
  • Reducing Forbes to one lane southbound from 3rd Avenue to provide safe separated space for people walking and cycling
  • Restricting left turns at 1st and 2nd Streets, 7am-7pm to keep the single southbound travel lane flowing

Forbes has been designed to keep trucks, buses, and cars moving, while improving safety for people crossing the street at 1st and 2nd [CLICK TO ENLARGE]

What We Heard:

  • Curbside access for businesses and customers is important
  • There are not enough loading zones or areas for short-term pick-up and drop-off
  • Safe space for people is more important than on-street parking


How We Are Responding:

  • Providing dedicated areas for commercial loading and passenger pick-up/drop-off
  • Setting time limits for curb spaces to encourage turn over
  • Working with local businesses to identify other areas that can support deliveries
  • Improving wayfinding to parkades in the immediate area
  • Reallocating some on-street parking space to provide safe mobility space for people

There are over 2,000 parking spaces available in parkades within a 3 minute walk of Esplanade. Some on-street parking has been removed to make room for mobility lanes and improved sidewalks. Less than 3% of all parking in the area has been removed to rebalance space for safely moving people along Esplanade.


Update: December 19, 2023

The Esplanade Complete Street improvements are now complete between Forbes Avenue and 3rd Street and along Esplanade to St Andrews Avenue. Visit our project webpage for details.

Update: October 18, 2021

Construction is underway. Visit our project webpage for details.

Update: May 17, 2021

Thank you for your interest in the Esplanade Complete Street project. Our Phase 2 public engagement period has closed and we’re reviewing all the input we received from stakeholders and the community. We’ll be presenting a summary of engagement feedback and the finalized design to Council before advancing to construction this summer.

Phase 2 - April 2021

Last November, we reached out to the community about our plans to redesign Esplanade to provide a safer and more comfortable experience for everyone. We heard from many of you about how you experience Esplanade, what’s important to you and what would make it better. Throughout this preliminary engagement process, safety was identified as the single most important issue to be addressed when reimagining the corridor.

Over the last few months, we’ve developed a design for Esplanade based on the project principles, community and stakeholder feedback and guidance from Council-approved policy, including our Safe Mobility Strategy. The outcome is a design that supports people of all ages and abilities, and achieves our design goals of:

  • Creating a safer, more comfortable experience for pedestrians and cyclists
  • Maintaining the existing road capacity for transit, trucks and passenger vehicles
  • Providing good access to local businesses
  • Creating a street that feels vibrant and welcoming


View the Design

The complete corridor design and renderings are available below. We've also summarized feedback from Phase 1 into seven themes. Under each theme, we’ve identified what we heard from you and how that feedback has been reflected in the design. We welcome your questions and comments.

[ Click image to view the full corridor and detailed design changes ]

What We Heard: 

  • Sidewalks are narrow and often cluttered
  • Seating areas are limited
  • Sidewalks are dark and unwelcoming
  • Driveways are points of conflict with drivers
  • Creating more green space would make the street more enjoyable to visit


How We Are Responding:

  • Creating wider sidewalks and relocating obstructions
  • Adding more accessible seating to provide places to rest or socialize
  • Adding pedestrian scale lighting
  • Creating safer driveway crossings by raising these areas to sidewalk height
  • Planting more trees to create separation between people moving at different speeds
  • Providing opportunities for businesses to create more attractive spaces for people to spend time

View of Esplanade looking west towards the Chesterfield intersection

1. Trees to be planted will provide shade and be more suited to an urban environment
2. New pedestrian scale lighting will contribute to a more vibrant and safe sidewalk
3. Planted medians provide space for seating under the urban tree canopy
4. Planted boulevards provide soft separation between mobility lanes and sidewalks
5. Wide boulevards have space for benches, bike racks, and street furniture, keeping the sidewalk clutter-free

What We Heard: 

  • Crossing the street is uncomfortable due to traffic speed and volume
  • Intersections can be dangerous points of conflict for cyclists


How We Are Responding:

  • Creating larger waiting areas at intersections to give people more space
  • Installing advanced walk signals at intersections that give people more time to cross the street before vehicles start moving
  • Installing accessible pedestrian crossing signals where they are currently absent
  • Tightening the corners at intersections so drivers must slow down when turning
  • Introducing a protected intersection design at Chesterfield

A protected intersection design will provide safer space for people, pedestrians and cyclists to cross the street, while also slowing down vehicles turning the corners [CLICK TO ENLARGE]

What We Heard: 

  • Cyclists feel unsafe riding in unprotected mobility lanes
  • Drivers feel uncomfortable beside cyclists in unprotected mobility lanes
  • People riding bicycles on the sidewalk create conflicts with people walking, rolling, and accessing shops


How We Are Responding:

  • Separating mobility lanes from vehicles, parked cars, and sidewalks
  • Creating safe passing space within the mobility lanes to accommodate different travel speeds
  • Improving connections to the broader Mobility Lane Network
  • Improving the existing separated lanes to reduce conflicts and improve accessibility

View of Esplanade looking east from Rogers Overpass

1. Physical separation between sidewalks, mobility lanes, and vehicles is achieved by reallocating space for parked vehicles
2. Planted boulevards provide soft separation between mobility lanes and sidewalks
3. Wider sidewalks provide opportunities for patios or other social spaces that do not impede pedestrians
4. High visibility pavement markings highlight areas where drivers cross over mobility lanes to access Esplanade

What We Heard:

  • Speeding is a significant safety concern for all road users
  • Excessive noise from speeding impacts the overall enjoyment of Esplanade
  • Cyclists riding too quickly on the sidewalk creates conflict with pedestrians


How We Are Responding:

  • Designing the street to support safe speeds appropriate for an urban street

View of Esplanade looking west from the Lonsdale intersection

1. Narrowed lanes support safe vehicle operating speeds and provide space for protected mobility lanes
2. Trees and other plants provide soft separation between people moving at different speeds
3. Curb buffers provide separation between mobility lanes and vehicles

What We Heard:

  • Maintaining frequent and reliable transit is important to transit riders and TransLink
  • Accessibility at bus stops could be improved


How We Are Responding:

  • Improving accessibility at existing transit stops
  • Designing bus stops to reduce conflicts between the sidewalk, mobility lanes, and bus stop areas

View of the bus stop area between Rogers Ave and Chesterfield Ave

1. Large waiting areas provide space for people waiting to cross the street
2. Bus stop accessibility upgrades aligned with RapidBus stop improvements
3. Bus stop designed to minimize conflicts between mobility lane users and transit riders
4. Accessible crossings allow for people to easily roll across the mobility lane when accessing the sidewalk or bus stop
5. Planted boulevards help with storm water management and provide greater separation from moving vehicles
6. Mobility lane narrows near crossing areas to slow cyclists

What We Heard:

  • Maintaining access to industrial areas and the Port of Vancouver is critical
  • Drivers are concerned about increased traffic and congestion


How We Are Responding:

  • Maintaining two vehicle lanes in each direction on Esplanade
  • Adding left turn lanes at St Georges to improve intersection safety and traffic flow around vehicles waiting to turn left
  • Coordinating signal timing to keep traffic moving
  • Reducing Forbes to one lane southbound from 3rd Avenue to provide safe separated space for people walking and cycling
  • Restricting left turns at 1st and 2nd Streets, 7am-7pm to keep the single southbound travel lane flowing

Forbes has been designed to keep trucks, buses, and cars moving, while improving safety for people crossing the street at 1st and 2nd [CLICK TO ENLARGE]

What We Heard:

  • Curbside access for businesses and customers is important
  • There are not enough loading zones or areas for short-term pick-up and drop-off
  • Safe space for people is more important than on-street parking


How We Are Responding:

  • Providing dedicated areas for commercial loading and passenger pick-up/drop-off
  • Setting time limits for curb spaces to encourage turn over
  • Working with local businesses to identify other areas that can support deliveries
  • Improving wayfinding to parkades in the immediate area
  • Reallocating some on-street parking space to provide safe mobility space for people

There are over 2,000 parking spaces available in parkades within a 3 minute walk of Esplanade. Some on-street parking has been removed to make room for mobility lanes and improved sidewalks. Less than 3% of all parking in the area has been removed to rebalance space for safely moving people along Esplanade.


Consultation has concluded
  • Share The greatest concern I have is with the significant increase in such LARGE tandem trucks roaring through our very densely populated lower lonsdale area. Will you be considering a reduction in the speed limit? ie 40 or 30 What impact will the new school in the area have to the speed issue.? Will the waterfront park upgrade also add to the argument to reduce the speed limit? And finally have you taken into consideration the traffic impact associated with reducing Forbes to just one lane southbound and allowing left turns. Keep in mind that these LARGE tandem trucks operate at all hours. Can you imagine them roaring down the hill after 7 pm and then having to come to a complete stop when a vehicle in front of them wants to turn left. Historically they have always been on the inside lane and therefore never having to stop for left turn vehicles. An accident waiting to happen. on Facebook Share The greatest concern I have is with the significant increase in such LARGE tandem trucks roaring through our very densely populated lower lonsdale area. Will you be considering a reduction in the speed limit? ie 40 or 30 What impact will the new school in the area have to the speed issue.? Will the waterfront park upgrade also add to the argument to reduce the speed limit? And finally have you taken into consideration the traffic impact associated with reducing Forbes to just one lane southbound and allowing left turns. Keep in mind that these LARGE tandem trucks operate at all hours. Can you imagine them roaring down the hill after 7 pm and then having to come to a complete stop when a vehicle in front of them wants to turn left. Historically they have always been on the inside lane and therefore never having to stop for left turn vehicles. An accident waiting to happen. on Twitter Share The greatest concern I have is with the significant increase in such LARGE tandem trucks roaring through our very densely populated lower lonsdale area. Will you be considering a reduction in the speed limit? ie 40 or 30 What impact will the new school in the area have to the speed issue.? Will the waterfront park upgrade also add to the argument to reduce the speed limit? And finally have you taken into consideration the traffic impact associated with reducing Forbes to just one lane southbound and allowing left turns. Keep in mind that these LARGE tandem trucks operate at all hours. Can you imagine them roaring down the hill after 7 pm and then having to come to a complete stop when a vehicle in front of them wants to turn left. Historically they have always been on the inside lane and therefore never having to stop for left turn vehicles. An accident waiting to happen. on Linkedin Email The greatest concern I have is with the significant increase in such LARGE tandem trucks roaring through our very densely populated lower lonsdale area. Will you be considering a reduction in the speed limit? ie 40 or 30 What impact will the new school in the area have to the speed issue.? Will the waterfront park upgrade also add to the argument to reduce the speed limit? And finally have you taken into consideration the traffic impact associated with reducing Forbes to just one lane southbound and allowing left turns. Keep in mind that these LARGE tandem trucks operate at all hours. Can you imagine them roaring down the hill after 7 pm and then having to come to a complete stop when a vehicle in front of them wants to turn left. Historically they have always been on the inside lane and therefore never having to stop for left turn vehicles. An accident waiting to happen. link

    The greatest concern I have is with the significant increase in such LARGE tandem trucks roaring through our very densely populated lower lonsdale area. Will you be considering a reduction in the speed limit? ie 40 or 30 What impact will the new school in the area have to the speed issue.? Will the waterfront park upgrade also add to the argument to reduce the speed limit? And finally have you taken into consideration the traffic impact associated with reducing Forbes to just one lane southbound and allowing left turns. Keep in mind that these LARGE tandem trucks operate at all hours. Can you imagine them roaring down the hill after 7 pm and then having to come to a complete stop when a vehicle in front of them wants to turn left. Historically they have always been on the inside lane and therefore never having to stop for left turn vehicles. An accident waiting to happen.

    Premiere asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback. Our design supports a reduction in the speed limit and your feedback will be part of ongoing conversations with TransLink about changing the posted speed on Esplanade.

    The changes to Forbes have been examined with increased vehicle capacity considered in traffic modelling. The City works with RCMP on enforcing unsafe driving behaviour and the City is engaging with the BC Trucking Association regarding these changes. Communications will be circulated broadly so all users are aware of the changes to the street to provide more space for protected safe infrastructure.

  • Share Did the City consider a design where bike lanes for both directions were together (instead of on opposite sides)? See Hornby Street in Vancouver as one example. Seems to me it's less space and reduced number of potential conflict points. on Facebook Share Did the City consider a design where bike lanes for both directions were together (instead of on opposite sides)? See Hornby Street in Vancouver as one example. Seems to me it's less space and reduced number of potential conflict points. on Twitter Share Did the City consider a design where bike lanes for both directions were together (instead of on opposite sides)? See Hornby Street in Vancouver as one example. Seems to me it's less space and reduced number of potential conflict points. on Linkedin Email Did the City consider a design where bike lanes for both directions were together (instead of on opposite sides)? See Hornby Street in Vancouver as one example. Seems to me it's less space and reduced number of potential conflict points. link

    Did the City consider a design where bike lanes for both directions were together (instead of on opposite sides)? See Hornby Street in Vancouver as one example. Seems to me it's less space and reduced number of potential conflict points.

    SM asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your suggestion. Bi-direction lanes were not determined to be the best option for Esplanade given the large number of crossing points with other streets and driveway accesses. A single direction lane on each side of the street was determined to be the safer option for this street context.

  • Share You say in your reply to a question you did not post, that there are left turns will be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access on off of Forbes. If you read your directive, that is 7 AM to 7 PM, in other words, when the majority of the vehicles want to access the area. You indicated there is 30% to 40 % usuage of parking spaces. Are those private spaces that noone other than a tenant can assess or public spaces. What is wrong with Forbes now after the millions the city of North Vancouver spent just a few years ago narrowing the streets and putting in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides that seem to accomplish the objective, for the greater good, of traffic flow, bicycle paths and pedestrian walks. For the money that is planning to be spent, what is being acheived, it works fine the way it is. I have not witnessed one pedestrian accident along Forbes in 40 years. On what basis are you spending the money to protect who from what, if there is zero past history? on Facebook Share You say in your reply to a question you did not post, that there are left turns will be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access on off of Forbes. If you read your directive, that is 7 AM to 7 PM, in other words, when the majority of the vehicles want to access the area. You indicated there is 30% to 40 % usuage of parking spaces. Are those private spaces that noone other than a tenant can assess or public spaces. What is wrong with Forbes now after the millions the city of North Vancouver spent just a few years ago narrowing the streets and putting in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides that seem to accomplish the objective, for the greater good, of traffic flow, bicycle paths and pedestrian walks. For the money that is planning to be spent, what is being acheived, it works fine the way it is. I have not witnessed one pedestrian accident along Forbes in 40 years. On what basis are you spending the money to protect who from what, if there is zero past history? on Twitter Share You say in your reply to a question you did not post, that there are left turns will be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access on off of Forbes. If you read your directive, that is 7 AM to 7 PM, in other words, when the majority of the vehicles want to access the area. You indicated there is 30% to 40 % usuage of parking spaces. Are those private spaces that noone other than a tenant can assess or public spaces. What is wrong with Forbes now after the millions the city of North Vancouver spent just a few years ago narrowing the streets and putting in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides that seem to accomplish the objective, for the greater good, of traffic flow, bicycle paths and pedestrian walks. For the money that is planning to be spent, what is being acheived, it works fine the way it is. I have not witnessed one pedestrian accident along Forbes in 40 years. On what basis are you spending the money to protect who from what, if there is zero past history? on Linkedin Email You say in your reply to a question you did not post, that there are left turns will be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access on off of Forbes. If you read your directive, that is 7 AM to 7 PM, in other words, when the majority of the vehicles want to access the area. You indicated there is 30% to 40 % usuage of parking spaces. Are those private spaces that noone other than a tenant can assess or public spaces. What is wrong with Forbes now after the millions the city of North Vancouver spent just a few years ago narrowing the streets and putting in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides that seem to accomplish the objective, for the greater good, of traffic flow, bicycle paths and pedestrian walks. For the money that is planning to be spent, what is being acheived, it works fine the way it is. I have not witnessed one pedestrian accident along Forbes in 40 years. On what basis are you spending the money to protect who from what, if there is zero past history? link

    You say in your reply to a question you did not post, that there are left turns will be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access on off of Forbes. If you read your directive, that is 7 AM to 7 PM, in other words, when the majority of the vehicles want to access the area. You indicated there is 30% to 40 % usuage of parking spaces. Are those private spaces that noone other than a tenant can assess or public spaces. What is wrong with Forbes now after the millions the city of North Vancouver spent just a few years ago narrowing the streets and putting in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides that seem to accomplish the objective, for the greater good, of traffic flow, bicycle paths and pedestrian walks. For the money that is planning to be spent, what is being acheived, it works fine the way it is. I have not witnessed one pedestrian accident along Forbes in 40 years. On what basis are you spending the money to protect who from what, if there is zero past history?

    Dougherty asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback. The current design on Forbes does not provide protected and separated infrastructure on both sides of the street. This upgrade will ensure that all users have a safe option for travelling on the street and to ensure the design meets safe widths for bicycle and walk infrastructure. The City is hearing from many stakeholders about the need to sure this space is wide enough for safe passing for those walking or using other micro-mobility devices.

    Regarding the left turn restrictions, there are other access options for the neighbourhood east of Forbes and this time restriction will distribute access across those points such as Mahon or Chesterfield.

    The parking spaces unused are available for public access. Not all off-street parking is restricted for private use and there are fully-owned and operated City lots in the area for those who do not want to use a privately owned lot.

  • Share First, how is it possible that traffic flow will be the same when you are funnelling traffic into one lane vs two, which means they go as slow as the slowest vehicle. You indicate "Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. Those "some hours" are 7 AM to 7 PM, when all the vehicles would want to access the businesses here. Did Translink sit here and actually watch the traffic flow, or is this some computer model that they speculate on, never having visited? I never saw a cord counting cars on Forbes? You indicate parking lots are only in use 30% to 40% of the time. Are those the private lots that are only available to tenants or the public lots? By the way, where is the closest public lot from First and Forbes? Just a few years ago the city ripped up Forbes, at a cost of millions, and put in bike lanes and sidewalks. So we have already endured a summer of reconstruction and trusted the city to provide bike lanes and sidewalks. So what is accomplished here, safety? In 40 years I do not recall seeing one pedestrian or bike accident on Forbes. Motorized wheel chairs go up and down with no problem. There is no parking so no car door is going to hit a bike. There are sidewalks to keep the pedestrians safe. The only thing is bikes and pedestrians have to share the eight feet or so on the east side. Paint a white line and save millions! Perhaps visit every sea wall in the lower mainland and see what they have done. What exactly is the City doing spending millions to accomplish what for whom on Forbes? on Facebook Share First, how is it possible that traffic flow will be the same when you are funnelling traffic into one lane vs two, which means they go as slow as the slowest vehicle. You indicate "Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. Those "some hours" are 7 AM to 7 PM, when all the vehicles would want to access the businesses here. Did Translink sit here and actually watch the traffic flow, or is this some computer model that they speculate on, never having visited? I never saw a cord counting cars on Forbes? You indicate parking lots are only in use 30% to 40% of the time. Are those the private lots that are only available to tenants or the public lots? By the way, where is the closest public lot from First and Forbes? Just a few years ago the city ripped up Forbes, at a cost of millions, and put in bike lanes and sidewalks. So we have already endured a summer of reconstruction and trusted the city to provide bike lanes and sidewalks. So what is accomplished here, safety? In 40 years I do not recall seeing one pedestrian or bike accident on Forbes. Motorized wheel chairs go up and down with no problem. There is no parking so no car door is going to hit a bike. There are sidewalks to keep the pedestrians safe. The only thing is bikes and pedestrians have to share the eight feet or so on the east side. Paint a white line and save millions! Perhaps visit every sea wall in the lower mainland and see what they have done. What exactly is the City doing spending millions to accomplish what for whom on Forbes? on Twitter Share First, how is it possible that traffic flow will be the same when you are funnelling traffic into one lane vs two, which means they go as slow as the slowest vehicle. You indicate "Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. Those "some hours" are 7 AM to 7 PM, when all the vehicles would want to access the businesses here. Did Translink sit here and actually watch the traffic flow, or is this some computer model that they speculate on, never having visited? I never saw a cord counting cars on Forbes? You indicate parking lots are only in use 30% to 40% of the time. Are those the private lots that are only available to tenants or the public lots? By the way, where is the closest public lot from First and Forbes? Just a few years ago the city ripped up Forbes, at a cost of millions, and put in bike lanes and sidewalks. So we have already endured a summer of reconstruction and trusted the city to provide bike lanes and sidewalks. So what is accomplished here, safety? In 40 years I do not recall seeing one pedestrian or bike accident on Forbes. Motorized wheel chairs go up and down with no problem. There is no parking so no car door is going to hit a bike. There are sidewalks to keep the pedestrians safe. The only thing is bikes and pedestrians have to share the eight feet or so on the east side. Paint a white line and save millions! Perhaps visit every sea wall in the lower mainland and see what they have done. What exactly is the City doing spending millions to accomplish what for whom on Forbes? on Linkedin Email First, how is it possible that traffic flow will be the same when you are funnelling traffic into one lane vs two, which means they go as slow as the slowest vehicle. You indicate "Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. Those "some hours" are 7 AM to 7 PM, when all the vehicles would want to access the businesses here. Did Translink sit here and actually watch the traffic flow, or is this some computer model that they speculate on, never having visited? I never saw a cord counting cars on Forbes? You indicate parking lots are only in use 30% to 40% of the time. Are those the private lots that are only available to tenants or the public lots? By the way, where is the closest public lot from First and Forbes? Just a few years ago the city ripped up Forbes, at a cost of millions, and put in bike lanes and sidewalks. So we have already endured a summer of reconstruction and trusted the city to provide bike lanes and sidewalks. So what is accomplished here, safety? In 40 years I do not recall seeing one pedestrian or bike accident on Forbes. Motorized wheel chairs go up and down with no problem. There is no parking so no car door is going to hit a bike. There are sidewalks to keep the pedestrians safe. The only thing is bikes and pedestrians have to share the eight feet or so on the east side. Paint a white line and save millions! Perhaps visit every sea wall in the lower mainland and see what they have done. What exactly is the City doing spending millions to accomplish what for whom on Forbes? link

    First, how is it possible that traffic flow will be the same when you are funnelling traffic into one lane vs two, which means they go as slow as the slowest vehicle. You indicate "Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. Those "some hours" are 7 AM to 7 PM, when all the vehicles would want to access the businesses here. Did Translink sit here and actually watch the traffic flow, or is this some computer model that they speculate on, never having visited? I never saw a cord counting cars on Forbes? You indicate parking lots are only in use 30% to 40% of the time. Are those the private lots that are only available to tenants or the public lots? By the way, where is the closest public lot from First and Forbes? Just a few years ago the city ripped up Forbes, at a cost of millions, and put in bike lanes and sidewalks. So we have already endured a summer of reconstruction and trusted the city to provide bike lanes and sidewalks. So what is accomplished here, safety? In 40 years I do not recall seeing one pedestrian or bike accident on Forbes. Motorized wheel chairs go up and down with no problem. There is no parking so no car door is going to hit a bike. There are sidewalks to keep the pedestrians safe. The only thing is bikes and pedestrians have to share the eight feet or so on the east side. Paint a white line and save millions! Perhaps visit every sea wall in the lower mainland and see what they have done. What exactly is the City doing spending millions to accomplish what for whom on Forbes?

    Dougherty asked about 4 years ago

    Industry standard traffic modelling software was used to analyze traffic flow along the corridor. The model was populated with pre-pandemic traffic data and factored by 30% to consider growth and stress testing. Traffic will not be funneled into one lane from two since only one travel lane exists on the approaches to southbound Forbes at 3rd (1 eastbound right turn lane from 3rd onto Forbes, 1 southbound lane on 300 block Forbes). 

    The 30-40% parking occupancy is an average for all publicly accessible parkades, both privately-operated and city-operated, within a few minutes walk of Esplanade. Parkade locations closest to you can be found on the map under the Parking, Loading, and Curbside Access section. Each parkade varies in its number of hourly paid public stalls, monthly paid stalls, and stalls reserved for customers of particular businesses, but all provide access to visitors of the area. 

    Council has directed staff to create a safer, more comfortable experience for pedestrians and cyclists. Generally this means separating road users traveling at different speeds. On Forbes this includes protecting southbound cyclists from vehicle traffic with physical barriers, and providing separate spaces for pedestrians and cyclists on the east-side.  

  • Share This is going to lead to traffic caos and make the life of the majority significantly worse. No turning left of Forbes will back traffic up such that people will go past Forbes and Third and down the side streets. Then crossing over until they hit Esplande and turn right, up Esplande to turn right. A simple commute is now a circus, times all the cars! As I have watched this street for 35 years, the ratio of bikes to cars is significantly less than 5%. What did the traffic study say, ot dont you want us to know. Right, the bikes go up the street and dont use the bike lane anyway so that sort of messed up your study? What happened to the greater good, why are we making all the motorists, and businesses suffer for the benefit of a few bike riders and pedestrians, who seem to have their bike / sidewalk on both sides of Forbes, seldom used, anyway. Taking out a lane, no left turns is absurd and will definitely make the lives of those of us who work here, and live here, worse. And of the purported 2000 parking spots, have you looked at your map and noticed they are mostly private, not accessable by the public who use businesses. Mind you, the City doesnt seem to mind taking taxes from me at 3 times the residential rate, even if I cannot rent my building???? on Facebook Share This is going to lead to traffic caos and make the life of the majority significantly worse. No turning left of Forbes will back traffic up such that people will go past Forbes and Third and down the side streets. Then crossing over until they hit Esplande and turn right, up Esplande to turn right. A simple commute is now a circus, times all the cars! As I have watched this street for 35 years, the ratio of bikes to cars is significantly less than 5%. What did the traffic study say, ot dont you want us to know. Right, the bikes go up the street and dont use the bike lane anyway so that sort of messed up your study? What happened to the greater good, why are we making all the motorists, and businesses suffer for the benefit of a few bike riders and pedestrians, who seem to have their bike / sidewalk on both sides of Forbes, seldom used, anyway. Taking out a lane, no left turns is absurd and will definitely make the lives of those of us who work here, and live here, worse. And of the purported 2000 parking spots, have you looked at your map and noticed they are mostly private, not accessable by the public who use businesses. Mind you, the City doesnt seem to mind taking taxes from me at 3 times the residential rate, even if I cannot rent my building???? on Twitter Share This is going to lead to traffic caos and make the life of the majority significantly worse. No turning left of Forbes will back traffic up such that people will go past Forbes and Third and down the side streets. Then crossing over until they hit Esplande and turn right, up Esplande to turn right. A simple commute is now a circus, times all the cars! As I have watched this street for 35 years, the ratio of bikes to cars is significantly less than 5%. What did the traffic study say, ot dont you want us to know. Right, the bikes go up the street and dont use the bike lane anyway so that sort of messed up your study? What happened to the greater good, why are we making all the motorists, and businesses suffer for the benefit of a few bike riders and pedestrians, who seem to have their bike / sidewalk on both sides of Forbes, seldom used, anyway. Taking out a lane, no left turns is absurd and will definitely make the lives of those of us who work here, and live here, worse. And of the purported 2000 parking spots, have you looked at your map and noticed they are mostly private, not accessable by the public who use businesses. Mind you, the City doesnt seem to mind taking taxes from me at 3 times the residential rate, even if I cannot rent my building???? on Linkedin Email This is going to lead to traffic caos and make the life of the majority significantly worse. No turning left of Forbes will back traffic up such that people will go past Forbes and Third and down the side streets. Then crossing over until they hit Esplande and turn right, up Esplande to turn right. A simple commute is now a circus, times all the cars! As I have watched this street for 35 years, the ratio of bikes to cars is significantly less than 5%. What did the traffic study say, ot dont you want us to know. Right, the bikes go up the street and dont use the bike lane anyway so that sort of messed up your study? What happened to the greater good, why are we making all the motorists, and businesses suffer for the benefit of a few bike riders and pedestrians, who seem to have their bike / sidewalk on both sides of Forbes, seldom used, anyway. Taking out a lane, no left turns is absurd and will definitely make the lives of those of us who work here, and live here, worse. And of the purported 2000 parking spots, have you looked at your map and noticed they are mostly private, not accessable by the public who use businesses. Mind you, the City doesnt seem to mind taking taxes from me at 3 times the residential rate, even if I cannot rent my building???? link

    This is going to lead to traffic caos and make the life of the majority significantly worse. No turning left of Forbes will back traffic up such that people will go past Forbes and Third and down the side streets. Then crossing over until they hit Esplande and turn right, up Esplande to turn right. A simple commute is now a circus, times all the cars! As I have watched this street for 35 years, the ratio of bikes to cars is significantly less than 5%. What did the traffic study say, ot dont you want us to know. Right, the bikes go up the street and dont use the bike lane anyway so that sort of messed up your study? What happened to the greater good, why are we making all the motorists, and businesses suffer for the benefit of a few bike riders and pedestrians, who seem to have their bike / sidewalk on both sides of Forbes, seldom used, anyway. Taking out a lane, no left turns is absurd and will definitely make the lives of those of us who work here, and live here, worse. And of the purported 2000 parking spots, have you looked at your map and noticed they are mostly private, not accessable by the public who use businesses. Mind you, the City doesnt seem to mind taking taxes from me at 3 times the residential rate, even if I cannot rent my building????

    Dougherty asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback. 

    The traffic analysis indicates that with the proposed changes, and when completing a traffic volume increase of 30% higher than pre-pandemic levels, that all intersections remain at a very high level of service without any significant change from the condition today. Left turns will only be restricted for some hours of the day with early morning and evening left turn access permitted. This will ensure that the southbound traffic on Forbes can continue to flow without interruption down to Esplanade. This analysis has been reviewed by TransLink and their third party analysis team and they agree that advancing these changes will result in a well functioning street.

    The City has also completed analysis of the parkades and in most lots only between 30-40% of parking spaces are in use at any given time. These lots are available for customer access. The project will be retaining between 50-55 parking spaces on-street for short term curb access on every block where parking could fit without compromising safety for all users.

  • Share You say you’re only removing 3% of parking however that’s the parking that’s right outside the stores and accessible!! Having to park in the parkade is totally unreasonable. You say you want feedback so please enlighten me how all of the feedback specifically about lack of parking on esplanade is being considered? Do not pretend to count the parkade as accessible parking on Facebook Share You say you’re only removing 3% of parking however that’s the parking that’s right outside the stores and accessible!! Having to park in the parkade is totally unreasonable. You say you want feedback so please enlighten me how all of the feedback specifically about lack of parking on esplanade is being considered? Do not pretend to count the parkade as accessible parking on Twitter Share You say you’re only removing 3% of parking however that’s the parking that’s right outside the stores and accessible!! Having to park in the parkade is totally unreasonable. You say you want feedback so please enlighten me how all of the feedback specifically about lack of parking on esplanade is being considered? Do not pretend to count the parkade as accessible parking on Linkedin Email You say you’re only removing 3% of parking however that’s the parking that’s right outside the stores and accessible!! Having to park in the parkade is totally unreasonable. You say you want feedback so please enlighten me how all of the feedback specifically about lack of parking on esplanade is being considered? Do not pretend to count the parkade as accessible parking link

    You say you’re only removing 3% of parking however that’s the parking that’s right outside the stores and accessible!! Having to park in the parkade is totally unreasonable. You say you want feedback so please enlighten me how all of the feedback specifically about lack of parking on esplanade is being considered? Do not pretend to count the parkade as accessible parking

    Nvstrong asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback. Council has directed staff to rebalance Esplanade so that it is safer for people regardless of whether they travel by car, transit, bicycle, or on foot. In order to achieve this it is necessary to shift some space from on-street parking to provide this space. The project team is considering all feedback from stakeholders and the public to create a safe design that supports people of all ages and abilities. Over 2000 parking spaces remain in the area. Fewer than 60 spaces have been removed.

  • Share What you are proposing with your plan is mainly with a gain of a dedicated bike lane and removing over 90% of the parking on Esplanade. Great expense to the tax payers for such a small gain. Bikes are out only when the weather is nice(sunny) a rainy day we hardly see any bikes around. With a long rainy season in North Vancouver we do not need such a change for only a bike lane. Taking away on-street parking, it's taking away convenience for older people (most of the residents down lower Lonsdale) to park in front of the grocery store, banks, coffee shop, fast food pick up and etc. We pay so much money for buying a car, the insurance, gas, electric charger, for using our car freely when we need to. The city should have not allowed to build so many buildings which is out of control and having no plans to the increased traffic.. The city did wrong from 15 years ago and still keep making more mistakes to the point which leave the residents choked up and there will be no money to even correct the mistakes. Stop making changes only for adding bike lanes, bike riders are making their own rules unfortunately. Bike riders creating dangerous situations for people on sidewalks for pedestrians and on the streets for vehicles. We live on Esplanade Avenue in one of the two buildings sharing one underground parking off Esplanade. There are about 250 units whose residents going in and out of the parking everyday many times plus about 30 visitors parking who uses the same parking entrance. So it will be very dangerous with the bike crossing our parking entrance. Bikes could use First street and Second street that are not a main route and are much quieter and safer for them. We are not happy about this change and many other residents of the Esplanade Avenue as well. Not all residents of the city on North Vancouver using online services to be able discussing their concerns about the huge change you are planning to make. We feel with the Covid19 situation the city is taking advantage of the situation to force unnecessary changes to our street and neighborhood. on Facebook Share What you are proposing with your plan is mainly with a gain of a dedicated bike lane and removing over 90% of the parking on Esplanade. Great expense to the tax payers for such a small gain. Bikes are out only when the weather is nice(sunny) a rainy day we hardly see any bikes around. With a long rainy season in North Vancouver we do not need such a change for only a bike lane. Taking away on-street parking, it's taking away convenience for older people (most of the residents down lower Lonsdale) to park in front of the grocery store, banks, coffee shop, fast food pick up and etc. We pay so much money for buying a car, the insurance, gas, electric charger, for using our car freely when we need to. The city should have not allowed to build so many buildings which is out of control and having no plans to the increased traffic.. The city did wrong from 15 years ago and still keep making more mistakes to the point which leave the residents choked up and there will be no money to even correct the mistakes. Stop making changes only for adding bike lanes, bike riders are making their own rules unfortunately. Bike riders creating dangerous situations for people on sidewalks for pedestrians and on the streets for vehicles. We live on Esplanade Avenue in one of the two buildings sharing one underground parking off Esplanade. There are about 250 units whose residents going in and out of the parking everyday many times plus about 30 visitors parking who uses the same parking entrance. So it will be very dangerous with the bike crossing our parking entrance. Bikes could use First street and Second street that are not a main route and are much quieter and safer for them. We are not happy about this change and many other residents of the Esplanade Avenue as well. Not all residents of the city on North Vancouver using online services to be able discussing their concerns about the huge change you are planning to make. We feel with the Covid19 situation the city is taking advantage of the situation to force unnecessary changes to our street and neighborhood. on Twitter Share What you are proposing with your plan is mainly with a gain of a dedicated bike lane and removing over 90% of the parking on Esplanade. Great expense to the tax payers for such a small gain. Bikes are out only when the weather is nice(sunny) a rainy day we hardly see any bikes around. With a long rainy season in North Vancouver we do not need such a change for only a bike lane. Taking away on-street parking, it's taking away convenience for older people (most of the residents down lower Lonsdale) to park in front of the grocery store, banks, coffee shop, fast food pick up and etc. We pay so much money for buying a car, the insurance, gas, electric charger, for using our car freely when we need to. The city should have not allowed to build so many buildings which is out of control and having no plans to the increased traffic.. The city did wrong from 15 years ago and still keep making more mistakes to the point which leave the residents choked up and there will be no money to even correct the mistakes. Stop making changes only for adding bike lanes, bike riders are making their own rules unfortunately. Bike riders creating dangerous situations for people on sidewalks for pedestrians and on the streets for vehicles. We live on Esplanade Avenue in one of the two buildings sharing one underground parking off Esplanade. There are about 250 units whose residents going in and out of the parking everyday many times plus about 30 visitors parking who uses the same parking entrance. So it will be very dangerous with the bike crossing our parking entrance. Bikes could use First street and Second street that are not a main route and are much quieter and safer for them. We are not happy about this change and many other residents of the Esplanade Avenue as well. Not all residents of the city on North Vancouver using online services to be able discussing their concerns about the huge change you are planning to make. We feel with the Covid19 situation the city is taking advantage of the situation to force unnecessary changes to our street and neighborhood. on Linkedin Email What you are proposing with your plan is mainly with a gain of a dedicated bike lane and removing over 90% of the parking on Esplanade. Great expense to the tax payers for such a small gain. Bikes are out only when the weather is nice(sunny) a rainy day we hardly see any bikes around. With a long rainy season in North Vancouver we do not need such a change for only a bike lane. Taking away on-street parking, it's taking away convenience for older people (most of the residents down lower Lonsdale) to park in front of the grocery store, banks, coffee shop, fast food pick up and etc. We pay so much money for buying a car, the insurance, gas, electric charger, for using our car freely when we need to. The city should have not allowed to build so many buildings which is out of control and having no plans to the increased traffic.. The city did wrong from 15 years ago and still keep making more mistakes to the point which leave the residents choked up and there will be no money to even correct the mistakes. Stop making changes only for adding bike lanes, bike riders are making their own rules unfortunately. Bike riders creating dangerous situations for people on sidewalks for pedestrians and on the streets for vehicles. We live on Esplanade Avenue in one of the two buildings sharing one underground parking off Esplanade. There are about 250 units whose residents going in and out of the parking everyday many times plus about 30 visitors parking who uses the same parking entrance. So it will be very dangerous with the bike crossing our parking entrance. Bikes could use First street and Second street that are not a main route and are much quieter and safer for them. We are not happy about this change and many other residents of the Esplanade Avenue as well. Not all residents of the city on North Vancouver using online services to be able discussing their concerns about the huge change you are planning to make. We feel with the Covid19 situation the city is taking advantage of the situation to force unnecessary changes to our street and neighborhood. link

    What you are proposing with your plan is mainly with a gain of a dedicated bike lane and removing over 90% of the parking on Esplanade. Great expense to the tax payers for such a small gain. Bikes are out only when the weather is nice(sunny) a rainy day we hardly see any bikes around. With a long rainy season in North Vancouver we do not need such a change for only a bike lane. Taking away on-street parking, it's taking away convenience for older people (most of the residents down lower Lonsdale) to park in front of the grocery store, banks, coffee shop, fast food pick up and etc. We pay so much money for buying a car, the insurance, gas, electric charger, for using our car freely when we need to. The city should have not allowed to build so many buildings which is out of control and having no plans to the increased traffic.. The city did wrong from 15 years ago and still keep making more mistakes to the point which leave the residents choked up and there will be no money to even correct the mistakes. Stop making changes only for adding bike lanes, bike riders are making their own rules unfortunately. Bike riders creating dangerous situations for people on sidewalks for pedestrians and on the streets for vehicles. We live on Esplanade Avenue in one of the two buildings sharing one underground parking off Esplanade. There are about 250 units whose residents going in and out of the parking everyday many times plus about 30 visitors parking who uses the same parking entrance. So it will be very dangerous with the bike crossing our parking entrance. Bikes could use First street and Second street that are not a main route and are much quieter and safer for them. We are not happy about this change and many other residents of the Esplanade Avenue as well. Not all residents of the city on North Vancouver using online services to be able discussing their concerns about the huge change you are planning to make. We feel with the Covid19 situation the city is taking advantage of the situation to force unnecessary changes to our street and neighborhood.

    Flowers asked about 4 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback. Council has directed staff to improve the safety of Esplanade for people of all ages and abilities who choose to travel on Esplanade whether by foot, bicycle, transit, or in a private vehicle. By providing separated and protected infrastructure that clearly provides space for all, we will be removing the conflicts you have described by ensure there is no need for people on bicycles to mix on the sidewalk with people walking or on the street with people driving.

    In order to provide separated space, some on-street parking was removed to rebalance how much of the street is dedicated for different modes of travel. Only 3% of the total parking in the area has been removed and hopefully it will be a more enjoyable street for local residents to walk along to access businesses and other destinations rather than feeling the need to drive is the only option.

    Regarding the safety at driveway accesses: This design will be implementing raised driveway crossings that will make people walking and cycling more visible than they are today which improves safety overall. 

    Staff examined different parallel routes for cycling through this area and it was determined that Esplanade does need to remain a cycle route since people riding bicycles also need to be able to access destinations safely. You can see the report with this analysis that went to Council in 2020 on the sidebar of this project page.

    The City is providing as many touch points as possible for engagement while also respecting necessary public health orders. All residents, owners, and businesses in the area have received a personal letter about this project and the project team is available to receive all feedback to discuss the design with residents. We have heard from many people who live and work in the area and all comments are considered and shared with decision makers.

  • Share Is the elevated pedway over Esplanade and running parallel to Rogers Avenue a part of this vision? If not, why not? Also, who has jurisdiction over this pedway? Is it the City? ICBC? The landlords of the buildings on the north side? It is an important link over Esplanade, and my preferred route, especially when going to and from the Seabus terminal. on Facebook Share Is the elevated pedway over Esplanade and running parallel to Rogers Avenue a part of this vision? If not, why not? Also, who has jurisdiction over this pedway? Is it the City? ICBC? The landlords of the buildings on the north side? It is an important link over Esplanade, and my preferred route, especially when going to and from the Seabus terminal. on Twitter Share Is the elevated pedway over Esplanade and running parallel to Rogers Avenue a part of this vision? If not, why not? Also, who has jurisdiction over this pedway? Is it the City? ICBC? The landlords of the buildings on the north side? It is an important link over Esplanade, and my preferred route, especially when going to and from the Seabus terminal. on Linkedin Email Is the elevated pedway over Esplanade and running parallel to Rogers Avenue a part of this vision? If not, why not? Also, who has jurisdiction over this pedway? Is it the City? ICBC? The landlords of the buildings on the north side? It is an important link over Esplanade, and my preferred route, especially when going to and from the Seabus terminal. link

    Is the elevated pedway over Esplanade and running parallel to Rogers Avenue a part of this vision? If not, why not? Also, who has jurisdiction over this pedway? Is it the City? ICBC? The landlords of the buildings on the north side? It is an important link over Esplanade, and my preferred route, especially when going to and from the Seabus terminal.

    Jcw6 asked about 4 years ago

    The pedway over Rogers Ave is an important pedestrian connection for many people in the area. This design maintains all access to the pedway for people choosing to use that path to access the Seabus and other destinations on the water.

  • Share Why does the existing design stop at St Andrews on the east. What about the last block between St Andrews and St Patricks? Why is it being left out? Secondly, why are there no buses that are accessible brom Esplanade and St Patricks. That is where I live. My mobility is limited as well as many of my neigghbours and for us to catch a bus to go to the seabus, we have to walk up a steep hill for 4 blocks to 3rd Street just to catch a connecting bus to the Seabus. Likewise on the return fare, if it is dark out at night it is 4 long blocks from 3rd Street. I would love to see a bus stop on 1st St and St Patricks if Esplanade is too busy. on Facebook Share Why does the existing design stop at St Andrews on the east. What about the last block between St Andrews and St Patricks? Why is it being left out? Secondly, why are there no buses that are accessible brom Esplanade and St Patricks. That is where I live. My mobility is limited as well as many of my neigghbours and for us to catch a bus to go to the seabus, we have to walk up a steep hill for 4 blocks to 3rd Street just to catch a connecting bus to the Seabus. Likewise on the return fare, if it is dark out at night it is 4 long blocks from 3rd Street. I would love to see a bus stop on 1st St and St Patricks if Esplanade is too busy. on Twitter Share Why does the existing design stop at St Andrews on the east. What about the last block between St Andrews and St Patricks? Why is it being left out? Secondly, why are there no buses that are accessible brom Esplanade and St Patricks. That is where I live. My mobility is limited as well as many of my neigghbours and for us to catch a bus to go to the seabus, we have to walk up a steep hill for 4 blocks to 3rd Street just to catch a connecting bus to the Seabus. Likewise on the return fare, if it is dark out at night it is 4 long blocks from 3rd Street. I would love to see a bus stop on 1st St and St Patricks if Esplanade is too busy. on Linkedin Email Why does the existing design stop at St Andrews on the east. What about the last block between St Andrews and St Patricks? Why is it being left out? Secondly, why are there no buses that are accessible brom Esplanade and St Patricks. That is where I live. My mobility is limited as well as many of my neigghbours and for us to catch a bus to go to the seabus, we have to walk up a steep hill for 4 blocks to 3rd Street just to catch a connecting bus to the Seabus. Likewise on the return fare, if it is dark out at night it is 4 long blocks from 3rd Street. I would love to see a bus stop on 1st St and St Patricks if Esplanade is too busy. link

    Why does the existing design stop at St Andrews on the east. What about the last block between St Andrews and St Patricks? Why is it being left out? Secondly, why are there no buses that are accessible brom Esplanade and St Patricks. That is where I live. My mobility is limited as well as many of my neigghbours and for us to catch a bus to go to the seabus, we have to walk up a steep hill for 4 blocks to 3rd Street just to catch a connecting bus to the Seabus. Likewise on the return fare, if it is dark out at night it is 4 long blocks from 3rd Street. I would love to see a bus stop on 1st St and St Patricks if Esplanade is too busy.

    din asked about 4 years ago

    The project area was selected to focus on improving safe multi-modal options for people travelling through the area. The Spirit Trail provides a connection for people walking and cycling between St Andrews and St Patricks that is safe and protected, while the rest of the street is primarily for local access only and not as utilized for through movements of vehicles. 

    Regarding bus service in the area, all service is provided by TransLink and the City does not make decisions about adding in bus routes or additional stops. If you are interested in bus service in this area, it would be good to provide this feedback to TransLink directly. City staff work with TransLink planners and operators when changes are proposed to service and stops.

  • Share To remove a lane of traffic to put up barriers is absurd. The Pedestrians already have sidewalks and cyclists have bike lanes on Forbes. It is perfectly safe. This is a very busy truck route and all it will take is one stall or accident and the traffic will be backed up to Fell. In your response to my earlier question you replied "The City has completed detailed traffic analysis of the Forbes corridor and we are confident that providing two lanes northbound and one lane southbound with restricted left turns will not cause traffic congestion. " I live on Second between Forbes and Mahon and I couldn't disagree more. There are not that many walkers and bikers compared to vehicles. Who completed the Traffic analysis? on Facebook Share To remove a lane of traffic to put up barriers is absurd. The Pedestrians already have sidewalks and cyclists have bike lanes on Forbes. It is perfectly safe. This is a very busy truck route and all it will take is one stall or accident and the traffic will be backed up to Fell. In your response to my earlier question you replied "The City has completed detailed traffic analysis of the Forbes corridor and we are confident that providing two lanes northbound and one lane southbound with restricted left turns will not cause traffic congestion. " I live on Second between Forbes and Mahon and I couldn't disagree more. There are not that many walkers and bikers compared to vehicles. Who completed the Traffic analysis? on Twitter Share To remove a lane of traffic to put up barriers is absurd. The Pedestrians already have sidewalks and cyclists have bike lanes on Forbes. It is perfectly safe. This is a very busy truck route and all it will take is one stall or accident and the traffic will be backed up to Fell. In your response to my earlier question you replied "The City has completed detailed traffic analysis of the Forbes corridor and we are confident that providing two lanes northbound and one lane southbound with restricted left turns will not cause traffic congestion. " I live on Second between Forbes and Mahon and I couldn't disagree more. There are not that many walkers and bikers compared to vehicles. Who completed the Traffic analysis? on Linkedin Email To remove a lane of traffic to put up barriers is absurd. The Pedestrians already have sidewalks and cyclists have bike lanes on Forbes. It is perfectly safe. This is a very busy truck route and all it will take is one stall or accident and the traffic will be backed up to Fell. In your response to my earlier question you replied "The City has completed detailed traffic analysis of the Forbes corridor and we are confident that providing two lanes northbound and one lane southbound with restricted left turns will not cause traffic congestion. " I live on Second between Forbes and Mahon and I couldn't disagree more. There are not that many walkers and bikers compared to vehicles. Who completed the Traffic analysis? link

    To remove a lane of traffic to put up barriers is absurd. The Pedestrians already have sidewalks and cyclists have bike lanes on Forbes. It is perfectly safe. This is a very busy truck route and all it will take is one stall or accident and the traffic will be backed up to Fell. In your response to my earlier question you replied "The City has completed detailed traffic analysis of the Forbes corridor and we are confident that providing two lanes northbound and one lane southbound with restricted left turns will not cause traffic congestion. " I live on Second between Forbes and Mahon and I couldn't disagree more. There are not that many walkers and bikers compared to vehicles. Who completed the Traffic analysis?

    dkelly asked about 4 years ago

    The current southbound painted bike lane on Forbes does not provide All Ages and Abilities (AAA) safe and protected infrastructure. Large vehicles can easily cross over the line and the lane itself is often filled with debris creating a complex condition to navigate around. Barriers are necessary for filling this gap in our AAA Mobility Network. You can learn more about our Mobility Network Project here 

    https://www.cnv.org/city-services/streets-and-transportation/sustainable-transportation/sustainable-travel-options/cycling/mobility-network-project

    Traffic analysis was completed by City engineers, reviewed by our design consultant, and is also being reviewed by TransLink. The analysis used pre-pandemic traffic volumes and also tested a condition with 30% more traffic to ensure the design could accommodate growth. The network continued to perform well through all modelling tests.