My feedback

9 results found

1. Reclaim road and/or parking space to create plazas and parklets.

   394 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   16 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   under review  ·  AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   An exciting idea!

   gregeh supported this idea  ·  September 06, 2010

2. Support Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) auto insurance premiums to reward those who drive little

   199 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   9 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Encourage shorter vehicle trips  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   under review  ·  AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   The City supports this idea, but implementation requires action outside municipal jurisdiction. The City will continue to advocate to the Province and ICBC for PAYD insurance.

   gregeh supported this idea  ·  August 05, 2010

3. Close downtown to traffic like London, expand Park & Ride to compensate

   92 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   5 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   Some interesting ideas here.

   First, a bit of clarification: London doesn’t prohibit cars from entering the city centre; rather it imposes a fee to discourage their use. This is commonly called congestion charging and it can serve multiple purposes: first, it reduces motor vehicle congestion so that the people who really need to drive (e.g. goods movement, taxis, and essential service vehicles) can get around without getting stuck in gridlock; second, it provides a potential revenue source which can be directed to support improvements to more sustainable modes (public transit, active transportation).

   Congestion pricing is an interesting idea for Vancouver — both as a means to reduce congestion and to generate revenue to improve transit service. It might make more sense to think about it at the regional (rather than city centre or municipal) level, though, given that it would affect travel patterns across the metropolitan area. It would also require support from the Province to make the necessary legislative changes. There’s a bit of the chicken-or-egg thing happening here too, since (a) for congestion pricing to be seen as equitable, good transit options need to be in place, and (b) congestion pricing is one of the primary ways we might help fund the necessary improvements.

   The topic of park-and-ride is a tricky one as well, and generally one we don’t support in the city, but which may have limited application elsewhere.

   Park-and-ride generally works best in suburban locations, particularly at stations where pedestrian volumes are low and/or feeder bus service is less frequent or reliable. There are a number of park-and-ride locations in Greater Vancouver, including several rapid transit stations: Scott Road, King George, Bridgeport, and Production Way – University. Some offer free parking, while others require a nominal fee.

   Park-and-ride is less appropriate in urban areas where pedestrian volumes are higher, or where there is potential for higher-intensity, pedestrian-oriented development. In urban settings, most people get to the station on foot, by bike, or other transit. Ensuring that the public realm around stations is pleasant and pedestrian-oriented is a top priority. Park-and-rides can be problematic, first of all because the large parking lots associated with them tend to be pedestrian “dead zones” that discourage walking, and secondly because they tend to increases motor vehicle congestion near stations, further worsening the situation for pedestrians, cyclists, and other modes of transit.

   Finally, urban park-and-rides occupy space within the walking catchment of a station that might have a better use. As a general rule, it is better to have more people living close to transit than to provide spaces for people to park near transit and live further away!

   Some interesting ideas here.

   First, a bit of clarification: London doesn’t prohibit cars from entering the city centre; rather it imposes a fee to discourage their use. This is commonly called congestion charging and it can serve multiple purposes: first, it reduces motor vehicle congestion so that the people who really need to drive (e.g. goods movement, taxis, and essential service vehicles) can get around without getting stuck in gridlock; second, it provides a potential revenue source which can be directed to support improvements to more sustainable modes (public transit, active transportation).

   Congestion pricing is an interesting idea for Vancouver — both as a means to reduce congestion and to generate revenue to improve transit service. It might make more sense to think about it at the regional (rather than city centre or municipal) level, though, given that it would affect travel patterns across the metropolitan area. It would also… more

   gregeh supported this idea  ·  August 05, 2010

4. Demolish Sears and replace it with a big green plaza

   48 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   4 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Improve access to nature  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   gregeh supported this idea  ·  August 04, 2010

5. Expand rapid transit along key corridors and build urban town centres around it.

   136 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   under review  ·  AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   You may be interested in learning more about the following programs:

   UBC Line Rapid Transit Study – http://vancouver.ca/ubcline and http://www.translink.ca/ubcline

   Central Broadway Planning Program – http://vancouver.ca/broadway

   Cambie Corridor Planning Program – http://vancouver.ca/cambiecorridor
   ____________________

   Outside City of Vancouver boundaries:

   Surrey Rapid Transit Planning Program – http://www.translink.ca/en/Be-Part-of-the-Plan/Public-Consultation/Current-Consultations/Surrey-Rapid-Transit-Study.aspx

   gregeh supported this idea  ·  June 24, 2010

6. Give TransLink more funding!

   46 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   9 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   Requires support from the provincial and federal governments. The draft Greenest City plan will advocate for new sources of funding for improved transit (e.g. congestion pricing, vehicle levies).

7. Revitalize the False Creek Flats

   70 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   4 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Improve access to nature  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   gregeh supported this idea  ·  June 24, 2010

8. Repeal mandatory bike helmet legislation

   408 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   72 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   AdminGreenest City Planning Team (Admin, CG2020) responded

   Provincial jurisdiction.

   gregeh supported this idea  ·  June 24, 2010

9. Promote electric taxicabs with tax and license fee incentives

   18 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  GC 2020 » Travel predominately by foot, bike, and transit  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   An error occurred while saving the comment
   gregeh commented  ·  June 24, 2010  ·  Delete…

   Current electric car battery tech is impractical for taxi drivers. They wouldn't be able to make it through a shift on a charge.

   Save Submitting...