Beacon Hill Park Road Closures

[Adam Fawkes]

Not sure if anyone's aware of the City's plans for changing/closing some of the roads at Beacon Hill park, but you can see the proposal on the City's web site and provide feedback until end of Friday Nov 26 (tomorrow). They are thinking about closing off some roads to traffic, which is generally a good thing, but might also result in the end of sprinting around the park at the end of the ride. Check out www.victoria.ca and click on 'what's new'. Cheers

[jeremy]

I just filled out the survey, and everybody else should too, the Beacon hill sprints are much much safer then the old dallas rd sprints, I'd hate to lose the park for cycling.

http://www.victoria.ca/cityhall/compar_ ... hill.shtml

[Rolf]

Looks like they're proposing closure of the road between the petting zoo and Dallas.

But if you look at the Draft Pathways Plan, you'll see that there would still be a "Multi-Use Path for cyclists and
pedestrians (3-5m wide)" along that stretch, and we could still do our laps. I believe that's slightly wider than one lane of traffic. Things may feel a little tighter, but it would not be the end of the world -- and it surely wouldn't be less safe than the Interurban sprint.

Personally, I welcome any subordination of the automobile in urban planning.

[Josh.E]

With the proposed turnaround loop, I imagine there wouldn't be a straight shot to the beginning of the multi-use path. The proposed bus parking area will have more impact on our laps, as that is right where we enter the park off douglas. We would have to do a hard 90deg corner on every lap.

Our morning laps aside, normally I'm always in support of shutting down car access, but I can't help but think this plan is going to do nothing more than increase car congestion, or decrease park usage. It's an urban multi-use park, servicing the majority of people in greater victoria, including elderly, handicapped, etc who use the park and probably get there by car. Right now the majority of the park area is currently accessible from most entrances. With these changes, each entrance point will only service a small portion of the parks land area and force people to always use the same exit they came in through. If you want to go to a different part of the park, you now have to drive around the appropriate entrrance, which is not not the best way to decrease vehicle congestion on roads around the park. I'm also not sure about these "drop-off" areas. Who do you usually "drop-off" in the park, and not go with yourself?
What about the horse and carriage tours. That's a part of the park's character. What about tour buses? Like it or not, Beacon hill park is not only for locals, it's a well known tourism destination that supports local industry.

Dunno, I use beacon hill park regularly in the daytime, and have never found traffic to be an issue in there at all.

I'm all for the trail upgrades, though.

[sylvan]

With the proposed turnaround loop, I imagine there wouldn't be a straight shot to the beginning of the multi-use path.

There would probably be something like a curb hop and a pole. Some practice for our next Belgian Kermesse season, I guess.

I can't help but think this plan is going to do nothing more than increase car congestion, or decrease park usage... If you want to go to a different part of the park, you now have to drive around the appropriate entrance...

This is the kind of quality argument that will have some resonance. That it'll mess up our sprint laps, not so much.

[Roland]

Maybe somebody should draw up an alternative plan with a dedicated crit course.

(And a velodrome in the center)

[Josh.E]

.....and a cyclocross course behind the petting zoo
.....and a bike polo pitch instead of the putting green

now we're cookin' with gas!

[Roland]

Cecilia Ravine park is also getting expanded. That would be a good place for a cross course. There is currently a plan for a MTB skills park.

http://www.victoria.ca/cityhall/compar_ ... tml#survey

[leftcoaster]

I read and filled out the survey.

If anyone believes we'll still be able to do our laps on the 'multi use path', then I have some real estate south and east of Oak Bay to sell you. Three to five metres will be about the width of the goose and will have pedestrian traffic, even at 7:00 a.m. Believe me, they are not envisioning 5 - 10 TS'ers flying around in a loop.

The survey is loaded in such a way as elicit a pre-determined response. Who doesn't want 'more green space' but making the perimeter roads busier and having to drive from 'cul de sac' to 'cul de sac' with small children is not particularly environmentally friendly.

If you want to stop it, the survey ends today.

[Rolf]

Cool, Dave. We've been looking at homes in SE OB. PM me the MLS #s.

[Lister Farrar]

I had a quick chat with John Luton about the thinking behind this. Apparently the main problem is commuters (in cars) cutting through the park, and turning it into a thoroughfare, inconsistent with a park.

The cut-through problem could be addressed by closing the roads to the north of the circle, but leave the circle open. That way it would be useless for short cuts, but still give access to the parking lot, petting zoo, and of course, cyclists.

Or it could be blocked by bollards, like the goose crossings. Cars wouldn't make it in, but cyclists could get through up to 2 abreast. And keeping the wide road way could be a way to avoid the constraints of being a multi-use path. I know John feels that multi-use is not really a good idea, as the mess when walkers and strollers mix with bikes on the Goose suggests.

I think it's important to recognize the need that started this ball rolling, and be positive about what is actually a good cause. And make a positive suggestion of an alternative. So, I'd like to suggest that cyclists write the mayor and council and suggest this.

(edit: I think the first option is better. Bollards mean what's beyond them is "multi-use, is messy, dangerous and slow.)

Had another thought: Dallas could have a bike lanes on either side ; it's wide enough from the totem to the Mile 0, and there's room if it needs more. It would make it easier to merge off Circle onto Dallas too.

[Paul C.]

re:Beacon Hill..I would like to see a trial period of no cars,just bikes and pedestrians..or maybe this is in the plan. I can also understand why some drivers and pedestrians may have a problem with a bunch of cyclists sprinting thru the park even at 7a.m. Their probably are some options for us.like use another area or start coffee earlier and leave the sprints for the races????

[Lister Farrar]

re:Beacon Hill..I would like to see a trial period of no cars,just bikes and pedestrians..or maybe this is in the plan. I can also understand why some drivers and pedestrians may have a problem with a bunch of cyclists sprinting thru the park even at 7a.m. Their probably are some options for us.like use another area or start coffee earlier and leave the sprints for the races????

I have to disagree Paul. Bikes and pedestrians are not a good mix. Its odd we're even having this conversation, since bikes are so firmly banned from sidewalks. A good example is the goose by the railyards development. The packed gravel area was meant to be for pedestrians, and the pavement for bikes. But pedestrians use all parts, and they are incompatible with even commuting speeds on bikes. I spent a morning there in bike to work week, and it's a miracle there aren't more accidents.

I can't see how drivers could object to us using the circle drive. We keep right, we're single file, there are few pedestrians at that time of day. For goodness sake, there are cars and trucks parked on the road in places. I can't see how that is a more legitimate use for a road than cycling. There would be even fewer cars with the cut-throughs to cook st and quadra st closed.

[Paul C.]

Lister ..with your experience and background I believe you are right. What I was thinking of was:

1.when I lived in Vancouver they where doing a once a Month on a Sunday in Stanley Park with no cars and it seemed to work quite well,mind you Stanley is way bigger than BHP. Also i was at a car free day 2 yrs ago in Cook st. village that seemed to work. But most people at these events where not Tripleshot or Red -truck roadies. If guys like us go to car free events we could bring our old cruisers, one speeds,mustang stingrays and 1950 Raleighs!!!!

2. And yes..if they don't like us sprinting in the Park , they could just not drive thru at that time of day.....plus I like to have lots of room when I sprint past younger guys like you....now could we also take out a few of those hills on Wednesdays???

see you on the ride, pc

[bikehart]

I sent a note to the Mayor using the city's online form and received a response from the Doug Demarzo. It appears that they are not committed to the traffic circle idea but are planning a barrier of some kind. Here is the interesting part:

..."Proposed changes to Circle Drive will not make it impossible for your group to use the circular route but will require you to use Circle Drive in a safe manner with respect for other users. You will be able to access Dallas road from Circle Drive through a bike friendly entrance. The cul-de sac proposed in front of the petting farm may not be included in the final recommendations. However there will still be a pedestrian style entrance that would also be suitable for bicycles. Both these entrances will require you to enter single file. Single file riding is no different than what is currently allowed under the motor vehicle act MVA 183.2(c)(d). The bus parking area will mainly be used after 10am in the summer months and you can cycle through it at your own discretion or alternatively enter the park farther north near Simcoe Street."....

Has anyone else had a response?

Hugh

[Josh.E]

I would have to take a couple deep breaths before responding to that one. He even felt a not so subtle lecture was necessary.

Obviously not a cyclist. I love how our recreational areas get planned by non athletes.
Regardless, a paceline is technically legal under the MVA if the slow line is to the right. The person/people being passed are riding as far to the right as is "practicable", and the remaining riders in the fast line have the right to take the lane and pass "at a safe distance"

[Lister Farrar]

Hugh, thanks for writing. I haven't got my letter off yet.

Doug is a good guy, and a mountain biker, which might partly explain why the plan doesn't seem to consider us. But on a completely different topic, while he has to be discrete, he's been a good resource at the city for a skills park in Cecelia Ravine below Burnside Comunity Centre, a project that will have far reaching effects on the acceptance of cycling in parks and elsewhere in the city. It's like where skateboarding was before cities built skateparks. We should work with them on this. I think by being polite and patient, but persistent, and many of us writing, we could get what we need. My personal opinion is that bikes and pedestrians are more incompatible than cars and bikes, and that should be the rationale to keep a road way for cars and bikes, and seperate paths for pedestrians. Also, the friends of Beacon Hill park are also a persistent lobby force for us to be aware of. Anyone know any members?