Skip to content

How can we reach our 2020
Greenest City Targets?

Arno Schortinghuis

My feedback

4 results found

  1. 408 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Arno Schortinghuis supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Arno Schortinghuis commented  · 

    Nobody is saying you shouldn't wear a helmet - simply that the helmet law is bad. Laws are meant to prevent people from harming others. Wearing or not wearing a helmet has no effect on others. Attempting to enforce the helmet law distracts police from addressing more serious issues like cars crashing into bicycles. We can still encourage people to wear helmets, but it doesn't make sense to force this on people with the possible exception of children under 16.

  2. 25 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    Thanks for sharing this idea!

    The city’s new 10-year cycling program master plan will soon be in development, and hopefully completed within the next year.

    A big part of the work ahead is to identify the complete cycling network, and the type of facility that is most appropriate and/or feasible for different routes. In some cases (e.g. busy arterial routes), separated lanes might be the best approach; in other cases (e.g. lower car volume neighbourhood streets), enhanced traffic calming and/or further reducing car access might be more appropriate. Travis cited some great examples in the Netherlands where cars are ‘guests’ that are allowed in, but do not dominate.

    In all cases, the goal should be to make routes that feel safe to all potential cyclists, including beginners, children, and seniors.

    For more information, visit http://vancouver.ca/cycling

    Arno Schortinghuis supported this idea  · 
  3. 229 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    Transit (and transit fares!) are controlled by TransLink, not the city. Having said that, reducing or eliminating transit fares is an interesting idea.

    Unfortunately it’s not very feasible, at least as TransLink is currently funded. Unlike most North American cities, Vancouver’s transit problems aren’t due to a lack of demand but rather a lack of capacity. Anyone who’s ever tried to squeeze onto one of our busy buses or trains knows this all too well — there isn’t enough space even when people have to pay, let alone accommodate the additional demand that would be created if transit were free. Compare this to cities with fare-free zones, which are typically struggling for increase demand, and which typically have (a) less frequent service and/or (b) plenty of extra capacity to accommodate more riders.

    In Vancouver, we need to provide more transit capacity to meet existing demand — and a LOT more…

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Arno Schortinghuis commented  · 

    Gary Bizzo: If you drive a car, you are being subsidized to the tune of about $8,000 per year by the rest of us. Automobile transportation subsidy is way bigger than transit subsidy. Cyclists are the only ones paying their way!

  4. 19 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Arno Schortinghuis supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base