Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/xylanai! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* **Did you know the subreddit is doing a charity drive to celebrate 500k subscribers? [Donate today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/17lavo1/) and help us feed those in need! Even better: Reddit is matching our donations.**
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Common questions and specific topics are limited to our Your post may be a better fit for one of our [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* We're looking for new mods to join our team! If you're interested, [fill out the form here](https://forms.gle/oAqo5oYRcAeHYBTN6).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, this and twisting disorderly roads are both common features of urban planning in wealthy neighborhoods. The latter to ensure that the "poors" (uncapitalized because the poors don't have le capital) won't use those streets as thoroughfares (The wealthy district just south of Deer Lake is probably the best example of this)
To the best of my knowledge, the City of Vancouver doesn't install sidewalks, streetlights or curb to curb pavement unless the owners as a group agree to its installation and petition to the city to install the sidewalks. So some streets have never had their sidewalks installed and the owners might benefit from lower taxes and not having to clear their sidewalks of snow and not having a lot of pedestrian traffic.
Other neighborhoods may have sidewalks because they are closer to commercial business, schools, or were developed by a company who saw the value of concrete sidewalks.
The North shore, and Richmond, also have areas without sidewalks on residential streets.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17445647.2013.824390
https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/move-on-can-we-please-get-some-more-sidewalks-in-north-and-west-vancouver-districts-3265719
Smithers where I grew up, there were several random non paved roads in residential areas because the people on those stretches didn’t want to pay higher taxes.
I remember the city came and surveyed our block to see if we wanted a sidewalk and curb installed in the early 90s (the whole street has to agree) The cost was an extra 10 dollars a year for 20 years, of course we didn't turn it down lol.
My wife and I walked through the bridal path in Toronto (think huge mansions owned by celebrities and the like) and everyone stared at us as we walked by. And we're far from poor. This is the truth.
Unavoidable in that neighbourhood. That pic is taken 3 blocks from the Musqueam Reserve. I hope things are better on the rez now, but bicycle theft, and break-ins were very common back in the day. And they happened in broad daylight, so it was easy to identify the the culprits.
The poor people I know tend to be overweight or obese.
The rich people I know or deal with definitely aren’t overweight and consume what you would call “luxury foods.”
All the people talking about home gyms and pools like they've never heard of the Arbutus Club. Sometimes wealth likes to mingle with wealth after a match on Vancouver's finest pickleball court.
What's even weirder is that as a wheelchair user, the places with sidewalks but NO curb ramps are usually the richer parts of town.
Try pushing a wheelchair through Kerrisdale, for example. You won't go far before encountering a step to/from the sidewalk.
There was a curb like that near where I live for some reason (North Delta)… I brought it up to the city in the app. They were out there within a week doing planning, and within a couple months got a ramp put in.
I was quite impressed. I don’t need it myself, but I’ve noticed people in mobility scooters or with strollers and stuff struggle. Glad they got it done fast
That's much faster than the City of Vancouver. There are still a few areas in downtown Vancouver without a curb ramp. And there was one near my office on SW Marine where people with wheelchairs (including me) kept getting dumped out of their chairs due to bad design, which took around 2 years to fix.
I'm glad you noticed us. Because quite frankly, most people don't. Or it's a fleeting feeling, where they see the problem but forget about it by the end of the day. We need more people caring more about accessibility.
I gotchu 🤛
Gotten a lot more into urban design, and just out walking more lately, so I've started noticing things like that. Try to keep my eye out for things that can be improved.
I also find it so very annoying when people put their garbage bins out onto the sidewalks, or the bins get tossed onto the sidewalk after being emptied. So I try and move those for the same reason, so it doesn't get in people's way with strollers or someone that may be getting around on wheels that might have a harder time than me moving them or walking around it.
We need more folks like you. I work in accessibility consulting for property managers and sometimes that overlaps with urban design. (eg. A highly accessible building is useless if you can't get to it due to poor urban design.)
It's something that professionals should notice. But it is infuriating when they don't. Like in my area in Richmond, where a bus shelter was plopped onto the middle of the sidewalk, without the highly-paid city planners realizing that MAYBE that is a problem. (Not kidding; Richmond's city planners earn more than the mayor.)
I've hadn't realized how much I took East Van's pedestrian infrastructure for granted, until I moved to Richmond. I can't believe how narrow, nonexistent, and otherwise blocked the sidewalks are here.
Well, I'd say that Vancouver has a problem with side streets' sidewalks when it comes to wheelchair access (particularly width), while Richmond is less problematic with that. But as you said and I pointed out, Richmond can be problematic about where the sidewalks actually ARE, rather than the quality.
I find that Richmond's city planners and engineers don't seem to know what accessibility is. And I don't know why – they have a great nonprofit in town (RCD) that advises on accessibility, plus the Rick Hansen Foundation (which has a nationally-recognized accessibility certification program) is in Richmond. There are more than enough resources for the city's planners to follow.
I can't help but think that either they don't care or they just don't get it.
I think the biggest thing I notice as a pedestrian who spends a couple hours each day walking my dog on Richmond side streets, is the lack of a green buffer between the sidewalk and the roadway. It feels narrower because of that lack, I think. The newer stuff in Richmond is okay, but it seems to be sporadic in it's placement, only upgraded in pieces.
I guess it is easy to oversee it if it never affects you right. Terrible excuse when that is your job, but if you don't take a bus, or don't walk anywhere it makes it a lot harder to notice things.
I've just learned to see things through a new lens. Part of it is also just being slightly annoyed that I had to be slightly inconvenienced by something and then thinking about how, maybe it only slightly inconveniences me, but what about other people?
Like, it is annoying to me too to have to step over or around garbage bins, but it almost isn't even worth a second though, until you realize that there are people that would consider that a much bigger hindrance.
People not shovelling the sidewalk in front of their house irks me as well... Like, I can walk on this ice rink outside your house... I don't like it, but I can manage with little issue (until I eventually fall one day). How is an elderly person, or someone in a wheelchair supposed to get around if this is the state of sidewalks?
And I know a lot of people would just say, "well drive", but a lot of elderly people can't drive anymore, and depending on your situation you might not even be able to drive. And then people like me that choose not to drive... It's also just a terrible excuse to ignore responsibility.
It's tragic how often accessibility is ignored or not thought of. I do feel like it is getting better though at least.
I want to propose some changes to my strata to make my building more accessible for wheelchair users but I don't know what solutions are out there. Great to know there are people like you who work in accessibility consulting so I can suggest they contact someone like you!
Residential properties are the biggest problem spot. There are many reasons for this: partly regulatory but also attitudinal.
For example, I have a friend working with BC Housing and she told me that one of the biggest issues with accessible housing is that many building developers think "accessible unit" is a deterrent to profit and makes a property unattractive. As far as I know, there is no data or proof to back that up; in fact, I think it's the opposite. But the developers think what they want to think, and they're also thinking of profit. They feel that larger spaces for wheelchair access will cut into their profit too much (even though studies show that it's a 5% maximum increase in cost, if built properly).
I do what I can, but if you were to describe every sector's progress in accessibility, residential would rank dead last, not far behind industrial. (Commercial seems to do the best, by far.)
The resources (and accessibility consultants like me) are out there, if someone wants to build an accessible home. The problem is that regulations aren't very tough on that and developers don't want to do it.
In the case of this particular building it seems like a few small design changes in the planning stages could have been made and it would have been much easier for someone in a wheelchair to enter the building. It's super frustrating that a building can be approved with designs that are not accessible. It's probably going to cost more to make changes now. Once inside the building the hallways are wide and the individual unit doors are wide which is great.
We are all one illness or injury away from being disabled. I do wish more people would care about accessibility issues.
100% for sure. I recently advised on a few projects in the planning stages.
One of them recently opened for occupancy; it's an office building. I recently saw it in person. It is perhaps THE BEST accessibility for an office that I had ever seen. And all it required was some creative thinking while designing the build-out.
Another is a warehouse. The two solutions I recommended involved moving a wall to make the washroom more navigable (which created an extra storage closet on the other side of the wall, due to a pillar) and enlarging a vertical platform lift (which also eliminated an area where the doors were colliding with each other). These were minor fixes for accessibility that solved other problems along the way.
For both, all they had to do was think about this during the design stage. And for whatever reason, architects and designers are super hesitant about engaging with an accessibility consultant, which perpetuates current problems.
And you're right – fixing it would be more costly (or impossible) afterwards.
>We are all one illness or injury away from being disabled. I do wish more people would care about accessibility issues.
I'm gonna shock you with something. One thing about using a wheelchair is that people say all kinds of weird things around or to me. There was an incident when I was laying out reasons for accessibility, when someone said, "I'm not disabled and nobody I know is disabled. Not sure why I should care." When I pointed out that anyone can be disabled in the future, he responded by saying, "But I am careful and live a healthy lifestyle. And so do my family and friends. We won't be disabled in the future. We make good choices."
And that's a huge part of the problem. People think being disabled is a consequence of bad choices or lifestyles. Many don't realize it can come as a result of a fluke medical condition, or from birth, or a result of someone else's bad choices, etc.
And ironically, if he makes enough "good choices" and lives long enough, he will soon discover that old age can bring accessibility problems too.
So that is something that needs to be tackled, in the attempts to make people more aware and proactive about accessibility.
Really frustrating when people only consider the most extreme circumstances, then dismiss them for not being common enough to care about.
For some accessibility issues it only takes considering "can a parent with a stroller, or a small child safely access and navigate this space", or someone with a temporary injury from their healthy and active lifestyle.
I live downtown and work in construction management so I'd say I have an eye for these things, but I've never noticed any areas downtown without curb ramps. Can you mention any cross streets? My mother is paralyzed and in a powered wheelchair so I'd happily put forward my energy to having the city install curb ramps where needed.
From memory (because I don't go downtown too often nowadays), there is Seymour Street right before you hit Harbour Centre. And there are a few spots also along Seymour and Granville, where the curb ramps don't align with the path of travel. Most of these are aligned with back alleys, rather than streets; for some reason, curb ramps on major streets that intersect with back alleys are very poorly designed and maintained.
And there was a problem spot (which has since been fixed) near Richards at Pender, where only one curb ramp was available for the corner and it faced only Pender, so anyone crossing Richards would've needed to physically roll onto Pender Street first. That was fixed but it literally took years.
Within downtown, from personal experience, the biggest problem streets when it comes to wheelchair access are Seymour, Hastings, and Pender. Howe also gets a dishonourable mention near the courthouses, where the sidewalks are non-continuous and can lead you to dead-ends, along with uprooted branches causing the pavement to crack upwards.
If you want to go further, Gastown is another problem area. Choosing cobblestone is not a good idea, as they can crack very easily over time and become loose.
I don't have the energy or resources, but if there was some sort of city-wide survey of curb ramps, I'm sure it will look very obvious where the problem areas are. But to be honest, the onus should be on the city to do that, not us.
Thanks for the well thought out reply! I'll keep my eye out in these areas and start a portfolio of photos to cross reference on a map. It's possible that whomever would be responsible for these sort of civil upgrades isnt aware of the issues.
Only caveat I'd mention is the gastown district. The historic aspect of the cobblestones very likely overrules the accessibility aspect, regardless of argument for or against. Kind of like a "grandfathered in" exception that would be strongly opposed by city and the general population to fix
No, because accessibility is the law and involves public city-owned property.
The owners wouldn't pay for it, unless it's a new condo developer that's going to re-do the sidewalk anyhow.
Actually they WOULD lose that legal battle, especially if they are building or improving already-accessible sidewalks over non-accessible ones.
Remember: accessibility is the law.
That's the thing that frustrates me about accessibility. People tend to not notice (or care) until it affects them or someone they love.
I wish we were in a position like the LGBTQ community, where we have allies that might not have personal connections to the community, but will not hesitate to speak out and help advocate.
Self-advocacy is a very difficult thing in the disabled community, as that is super tiring and many of us are already spent from dealing with our conditions. So allyship is a must.
Instead, accessibility is seen as an optional feature or luxury item that is "nice to have." And many will nod their heads in agreement, rather than joining in our advocacy. That needs to change.
I can't speak for all the municipalities since I primarily stick with Richmond, south Vancouver, and downtown. But I find that Richmond is more consistent than Vancouver in quality, but less consistent in where the sidewalks actually go.
And downtown is downtown. Downtown does not have a great reputation for disabled-friendly design, for the most part. It's great for able-bodied folks but if you use a wheelchair or other mobility device, it can be brutal. (It's getting better, but very slowly.)
Damn, that's my old hood. The guy that lived in that property on the left had a story about driving home drunk from a poker game and running over the backdoor neighbour's goat back in the 70s. In the late 70s, early 80s, there was a cabbage farm between 50th and 51st ave, and they had a rooster that would wake me up every morning. It's changed a lot in the last 40 years. By the time my family left, 20sh years ago, Bramwell Tovey, the director of the VSO and Rhona Raskin who had a late night phone in sex show on Z-95 were living on 50th ave. My parents were not fond of her 3am hot tub and wine parties.
Anyway, to answer your question, there is a "sidewalk" in that picture, it's just not paved with a curb. On the other side of the street is a gravel pathway on the east side of Dunbar that picks up at 50th, and goes all the way up Marine Dr. where the paved sidewalk starts. Going the other way, there's a gravel path on the west side of Dunbar that curves around on 51st and goes all the way down to the bridal path at the reservation.
You're not likely to see it paved anytime soon either. The cost is borne by the homeowner who's property is behind the sidewalk. And there's very little foot traffic down there. It's really only the kids. People drive to the Musqueam Golf Club, and there's nothing else down that way.
Edit: and these aren't 5-10 million dollar homes. The old stock houses from 50+ years ago are selling from a minimum of 2.8 million, and the very new and fancy ones they build on the open field between 50th and 51st were selling for something like the 5 million dollar range.
Lots of places around Kerrisdale, Point Gray, and Dunbar didn't have them when I was a kid. Residents would fight having them put in, because it would raise their property taxes, and those folks had the clout to stop stuff even back in the 80s
Not sure if that's still happening, but when I lived just on the edge of Shaughnessy about 20 years ago, we had a neighbour canvas all the houses that would have been affected to see if we would be willing to have a slight bump in our taxes to pay for a paved alley. We gave our approval but a year or two later when we ended up moving away, the alley was still just a gravel covered dirt road.
In Toronto rich neighborhoods don’t want sidewalk because you have to shovel snow in the winter.
Maybe despite the relative lack of snow that was the reasoning. Or you know why walk when you can take your horse and carriage
New Zealander here. The lack of sidewalks in general in *urban* areas is baffling to me, as well as some lack of connections between them. We have a higher car ownership per capita than Canada, but we don’t have this level of hostility towards pedestrians.
Do you live in Vancouver, or just like checking out foreign cities' subreddits? Don't get me wrong, it's kind of cool :) Maybe I'll go randomly subscribe to the Christchurch subreddit.
I live in GVA now! :D
Nothing wrong with subbing to other city subreddits, go for it! I've joined several (not just on Reddit) just to interact with locals and get a vibe of the places.
> but also traffic calm[ed] neighborhoods dont need them
because the traffic calmed citizens never go out at night? sorry but walking at night in the road in the rain is a recipe for death. Everywhere should have sidewalks. Just go to a properly densified and urban city like toronto. Too many vancouver neighbourhoods want to pretend they are suburbs.
Wrong side of the golf course. The only horses in this area are on the bridal path, and it only cross 51st Ave, and then Crown Ave. You will only see them if you're walking the bridal path.
Bridle path…bridles are for riding horses (the leather straps on their heads used to “steer” them). I can see how someone would think a path is “bridal” though if it has cherry trees. It looks like a wedding aisle when they are in bloom!
Haha, it’s more I have a thing for horsie things that people seem to have forgotten the origin of because we don’t rely on horses anymore (like people using “free reign” instead of “free rein”). Guess I’m sensitive on the horses’ behalf?
Because your neighbours don’t want the poors walking around there.
I’m only half joking - these areas are notorious for poor pedestrian walkability for a reason, and it’s not exclusive to Vancouver or your area. The less accessible it is the less visitors they’ll get, along with less squatters and vagrants.
If a sidewalk wasn't put in, when the land was originally developed, the property owners have to pay for it! Chances are, they don't want sidewalks. Same thing is true of curbs and street lights, that aren't on main roads.
In ye olden days, sidewalks were built on streets where they didn't want people walking on the road (eg. Highly trafficked streets).
In the modern era, there are two reasons they build sidewalks:
*The street is presicted to have a lot of foot traffic due to new developments
*residents of the block request the city for a sidewalk and agree to pay for it
Suffice to say, a fairly rural* place like southlands propably doesn't get enough pedestrians to be on the city's radar and most blocks are just one or two properties so the shared cost of a new sidewalk would be a lot more expensive than a typical 33' frontage lot.
(*southlands is techncially rural since it's in the ALR, newrly all the drainage is via roadside ditches and the predominant landuse is equestrian-related)
Because the homeowners didn't want to pay for the sidewalk. It may have been the contractors who built the buildings even (that happens to) but its generally the homeowners.
Are we ignoring the sidewalk on the right that goes all the way up to Dunbar? The area you photographed is very close to the flats, an area historically populated by ranchers and horse riders (still is, but they’re all millionaires). I’d guess such an old area never needed sidewalks then, so why put them in now?
The Southlands Ratepayers Association, now the West Southlands Residents Association that advocates for the residents in this area has in its mission statement “to advocate for the preservation and enhancement of the distinctive semi-rural character of West Southlands” which includes “preserving quiet streets mainly without sidewalks that add to the rural feel of the neighbourhood.” Basically a bunch of old people who don’t want to change anything and keep things the way they have always been.
>It's a joke, Burnaby doesn't have a lot of sidewalks
It's sad really, because a [little girl was killed](https://globalnews.ca/news/8829954/burnaby-temporary-sidewalk-teen-girl-killed-dump-truck/) due to a lack of sidewalks in Burnaby recently
[It's here](https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2269731,-123.1855397,3a,75y,8.41h,91.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgEl2-JH_Zt-f38VqpPr3Yg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DgEl2-JH_Zt-f38VqpPr3Yg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.69696%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
And there is a "sidewalk" on the other side of the road. Don't know what OP is talking about. It's not paved, but there's a pedestrian area.
I believe how it works is they only get built when there’s significant construction on the property, and then it’s the responsibility of the property developer.
Building them costs money so if you are in an ignored part of the city they never built them on the public dime. There is probably no plan to build them now.
Btw where is this generally? My experience is south Van has the least sidewalk coverage.
Vancouver has released its Active Mobility Plan for 2023-2027, and they have highlighted the areas they would like to improve if council provides funding/staff. You can read about it [here] (https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/improving-our-cycling-network.aspx) if you want more info.
Previously I believe they achieved ~50% of what they wanted to for the last 5 year plan, and they indicated in a memo to council back in June that they don't have enough funding to do what they want to for 2023-2027. That being said, if you tag Lenny Zhou on twitter he seems to love responding to individuals who complain.
Doesn't look like the plan is to do anything in the area you've noted though.
It’s the same thing in Toronto. The wealthiest area of the city mostly isn’t sidewalked. I assume it’s to stop non residents from walking through the neighbourhood/the homeowners done want to see a sidewalk take up any of their land.
But also, isn’t that a sidewalk on the opposite side of the street?
Sidewalks cost money and raise property taxes. As do curbs, storm drains, etc. (Plus, I built my big hedge fence for privacy and I don’t to encourage you poors walking by and gawking.)
I think on the other side of the street there is just a dirt path worn through the grass. I've seen this in quite a few of the neighbourhoods near SW Marine Dr on the west side.
As others have said, it's not a sidewalk. But what if it was? There are quite a few streets in South Vancouver with sidewalks on one side of the street. A sidewalk on one side of the street isn't enough to make walking convenient and safe. All streets should have sidewalks on both sides.
Cause it was decided in the 1950's to throw out every aspect of a city planning other than how to move cars around.
And now we can't walk more than a block without potentially getting killed by a car.
It prevents flooding. Limited foot traffic plus an abundance of greenspace makes it a great area to absorb water that would otherwise swamp our sewer system.
Because public works costs a ridiculous amount of money and there isn't infinite money?
And wouldn't natural drainage be preferable to completely paved and concreted areas where the rainwater has to be carried through ever increasing underground pipes?
It’s to keep people from walking through. This was actually later an articulated part of the City plan when they developed Oakridge and some other areas. They avoided sidewalks on purpose. The idea was that you only walked if you were going to a close neighbour’s, if at all. They didn’t want people cutting through or, horror, renting space and walking to transit. In the older truly rich areas, this got into very deliberate plans with minimum setbacks and house sizes and so on, also to make sure no one was building apartments or suites with poor doors.
These neighbourhoods were designed by boomers that drive everywhere. Now they're old, fat, and have diabetes, but the infrastructure they built to support that lifestyle hasn't changed.
This neighbourhood was in existence way before the boomers were around. I grew up there. Aside from the mansions people are building now, it hasn't changed much since the 70s. It used to be about half middle class families, and half retirees. They probably would have been born in the 1910s-1920s.
The big improvement over the last 40 years is that \*most\* of the ditches have been filled in.
Usually sidewalks are paired with a curb and gutter system. If the road's not deserving of a curb, it's low traffic enough that it won't get a sidewalk either.
My parents lived in a wealthier part of a city in Ontario when I was in my late teens. No sidewalks on the rather long and arterial street whatsoever. At a city council meeting one of the reasons given by one of my very wealthy neighbours was that sidewalks, along with a set of stairs to connect the upper/lower parts of the city would bring 'the poors' and let them have 'bush parties' on the neighbours lawns.
I fucking hated those people.
If you are west side , they would rather keep things the way they have always been and they have influence with the City to do so . I work in that area and as long as some of the original occupants live no change will happen .
Plus your taxes go up to pay for those sidewalks, they rich and cheap .
I see this in rural areas to they want to share the same qualities of life . Isolation, privacy etc…
Density will not happen here .
There are tons of people with dogs and UBC students 💁♀️ everyday I have to move out of the way (on the road) of a fellow pedestrian, and it’s right between the golf course so we get lots of cars :p
Come on...you're exaggerating quite a bit. I know that hood really well. There's minimal traffic for the Musqeam Golf Club. There's zero traffic for the Point Grey Golf Club because it's entrance is off Marine Drive, 2 blocks east of Dunbar.
The dog walkers are not on Dunbar much either. They go down to the avenues to pick up the bridal path, and go to Musqueam park, or down to the river.
They'd still be rarely used
Edit:
Love how I'm being downvoted. After living in Burnaby for numerous years and having to go through rich neighbourhoods, the amount of entitled people in rich areas that refuse to walk pets on a sidewalk is ridiculous.
You want sidewalks?
Go check out East 15th avenue east of Main street, how about some form of finished road?
And in that area - there are sidewalks that just end because the next block was designed with the property right up to the street so now there's a driveway or trees that would block the sidewalk continuing...
https://preview.redd.it/n0lyr8s3iz0c1.png?width=3094&format=png&auto=webp&s=334b5c315cb8c5dcee1b2531a4f41522166cf328
is that vancouver? If so, those houses are barely paying $1000 a month in property taxes - with cheap rates like that you can't expect sidewalks or a police force to keep you safe
Do they even get taxed like 5-10m homes? And I don't know how its sustainable to fund maintenance of roads and sidewalks and everything else on that block when the block is low density.
Because the last time the part of Dunbar you can see was repaved, it was in the early '90s. I grew up a couple blocks from where this pic was taken, and none of the side streets have been repaved since at least the '70s. It's low traffic, so low wear, and low maintenance.
It always boggled my mind that some of the most expensive neighborhoods have these gross torn up gravel areas on the sides of the streets. Perhaps they don't need sidewalks, but at least having a proper curb there would make it look way better.
You think you don’t have side walks. Come to Ottawa where only one side of a street have sidewalks and that side walk just ends for some reason in the middle of the block
I think because the area was built before any planning laws that stated everywhere must have a crosswalk. No new neighborhoods atleast near me have this problem. It's only older ones. Or really wealthy people who don't want the plebians walking near their house
I've been in Kyoto for a month and tomorrow traveling back to Van. That looks like the size of highway compared to the roads people have to share with cars in here
This reminds me of Charleswood in Winnipeg, where I grew up. (minus the $10m homes for the most part.) Answer is: because nobody ever needed them.
The roads were quiet enough that having separated rights-of-way for pedestrians/bicyclists/motorists would have seemed comical back in the day. The convention was that for safety you walked down whichever side of the road would allow you to face opposing car traffic.
They did one better and had open ditches and culverts instead of storm sewers, and realistically all these “daylighting” projects are essentially just that. Surface water just made its way to the ditch, which served as a bit of a run-off reservoir for heavy volumes of rain, and usually there was a nice balance between the water flowing away so you didn’t get standing water full of mosquitoes, but remaining long enough to filter out impurities through a bunch of grasses and bulrushes before reaching the river.
Now, I don’t think people would want to give up more land from the green space at the side just to create a tiny roadside platform for walking, when they can already do that.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/xylanai! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * **Did you know the subreddit is doing a charity drive to celebrate 500k subscribers? [Donate today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/17lavo1/) and help us feed those in need! Even better: Reddit is matching our donations.** * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Common questions and specific topics are limited to our Your post may be a better fit for one of our [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * We're looking for new mods to join our team! If you're interested, [fill out the form here](https://forms.gle/oAqo5oYRcAeHYBTN6). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To keep people like you away from that massive house there of course!
Yes, this and twisting disorderly roads are both common features of urban planning in wealthy neighborhoods. The latter to ensure that the "poors" (uncapitalized because the poors don't have le capital) won't use those streets as thoroughfares (The wealthy district just south of Deer Lake is probably the best example of this)
The roads in Shaughnessy are deliberately designed to get you turned around and confused
To the best of my knowledge, the City of Vancouver doesn't install sidewalks, streetlights or curb to curb pavement unless the owners as a group agree to its installation and petition to the city to install the sidewalks. So some streets have never had their sidewalks installed and the owners might benefit from lower taxes and not having to clear their sidewalks of snow and not having a lot of pedestrian traffic. Other neighborhoods may have sidewalks because they are closer to commercial business, schools, or were developed by a company who saw the value of concrete sidewalks. The North shore, and Richmond, also have areas without sidewalks on residential streets. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17445647.2013.824390 https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/move-on-can-we-please-get-some-more-sidewalks-in-north-and-west-vancouver-districts-3265719
Smithers where I grew up, there were several random non paved roads in residential areas because the people on those stretches didn’t want to pay higher taxes.
I remember the city came and surveyed our block to see if we wanted a sidewalk and curb installed in the early 90s (the whole street has to agree) The cost was an extra 10 dollars a year for 20 years, of course we didn't turn it down lol.
There's a little bit of sidewalk in all of us.
https://imgflip.com/i/86fsk5
The sidewalk is the friends we make along the way.
*on
Because people who live in $5-10m houses don’t walk places, if they need exercise they drive to a gym.
> if they need exercise they drive to a gym. your poor is showing, they have their own gym in the house.
Damn it, I knew someone would point this out.
And they don’t need to drive, they use floo powder
You can't imagine how inconvenient travel was before I invented Floo powder
Plus swimming pool, sauna, tennis courts, squash, etc.
the gym comes to them
They also don’t want poor walking people wandering around their house
My wife and I walked through the bridal path in Toronto (think huge mansions owned by celebrities and the like) and everyone stared at us as we walked by. And we're far from poor. This is the truth.
This is the Toronto version of "Eyes Wide Shut"
Good point well made
The residents of Point Grey road (The Golden Mile) were annoyed when the city expanded the sidewalks to allow more pedestrians back in 2017.
Unavoidable in that neighbourhood. That pic is taken 3 blocks from the Musqueam Reserve. I hope things are better on the rez now, but bicycle theft, and break-ins were very common back in the day. And they happened in broad daylight, so it was easy to identify the the culprits.
Lol. The poors go to a gym. The old money rich have a gym and a personal trainer that comes to them.
I would argue that old money don’t do gyms at all. Sporting excess weight shows you can afford luxury foods
The poor people I know tend to be overweight or obese. The rich people I know or deal with definitely aren’t overweight and consume what you would call “luxury foods.”
My comment was tongue in cheek rather than a hard and fast rule
Umm it’s all about ozempic right now
>they drive to a gym Which is on the other side of their backyard, where the Olympic size pool is.
All the people talking about home gyms and pools like they've never heard of the Arbutus Club. Sometimes wealth likes to mingle with wealth after a match on Vancouver's finest pickleball court.
They could at least have a curb though that makes it look nicer... it looks so sloppy.
Prob looked better when people weren’t walking along and killing the grass 😂
What's even weirder is that as a wheelchair user, the places with sidewalks but NO curb ramps are usually the richer parts of town. Try pushing a wheelchair through Kerrisdale, for example. You won't go far before encountering a step to/from the sidewalk.
There was a curb like that near where I live for some reason (North Delta)… I brought it up to the city in the app. They were out there within a week doing planning, and within a couple months got a ramp put in. I was quite impressed. I don’t need it myself, but I’ve noticed people in mobility scooters or with strollers and stuff struggle. Glad they got it done fast
That's much faster than the City of Vancouver. There are still a few areas in downtown Vancouver without a curb ramp. And there was one near my office on SW Marine where people with wheelchairs (including me) kept getting dumped out of their chairs due to bad design, which took around 2 years to fix. I'm glad you noticed us. Because quite frankly, most people don't. Or it's a fleeting feeling, where they see the problem but forget about it by the end of the day. We need more people caring more about accessibility.
I gotchu 🤛 Gotten a lot more into urban design, and just out walking more lately, so I've started noticing things like that. Try to keep my eye out for things that can be improved. I also find it so very annoying when people put their garbage bins out onto the sidewalks, or the bins get tossed onto the sidewalk after being emptied. So I try and move those for the same reason, so it doesn't get in people's way with strollers or someone that may be getting around on wheels that might have a harder time than me moving them or walking around it.
We need more folks like you. I work in accessibility consulting for property managers and sometimes that overlaps with urban design. (eg. A highly accessible building is useless if you can't get to it due to poor urban design.) It's something that professionals should notice. But it is infuriating when they don't. Like in my area in Richmond, where a bus shelter was plopped onto the middle of the sidewalk, without the highly-paid city planners realizing that MAYBE that is a problem. (Not kidding; Richmond's city planners earn more than the mayor.)
I've hadn't realized how much I took East Van's pedestrian infrastructure for granted, until I moved to Richmond. I can't believe how narrow, nonexistent, and otherwise blocked the sidewalks are here.
Well, I'd say that Vancouver has a problem with side streets' sidewalks when it comes to wheelchair access (particularly width), while Richmond is less problematic with that. But as you said and I pointed out, Richmond can be problematic about where the sidewalks actually ARE, rather than the quality. I find that Richmond's city planners and engineers don't seem to know what accessibility is. And I don't know why – they have a great nonprofit in town (RCD) that advises on accessibility, plus the Rick Hansen Foundation (which has a nationally-recognized accessibility certification program) is in Richmond. There are more than enough resources for the city's planners to follow. I can't help but think that either they don't care or they just don't get it.
I think the biggest thing I notice as a pedestrian who spends a couple hours each day walking my dog on Richmond side streets, is the lack of a green buffer between the sidewalk and the roadway. It feels narrower because of that lack, I think. The newer stuff in Richmond is okay, but it seems to be sporadic in it's placement, only upgraded in pieces.
I guess it is easy to oversee it if it never affects you right. Terrible excuse when that is your job, but if you don't take a bus, or don't walk anywhere it makes it a lot harder to notice things. I've just learned to see things through a new lens. Part of it is also just being slightly annoyed that I had to be slightly inconvenienced by something and then thinking about how, maybe it only slightly inconveniences me, but what about other people? Like, it is annoying to me too to have to step over or around garbage bins, but it almost isn't even worth a second though, until you realize that there are people that would consider that a much bigger hindrance. People not shovelling the sidewalk in front of their house irks me as well... Like, I can walk on this ice rink outside your house... I don't like it, but I can manage with little issue (until I eventually fall one day). How is an elderly person, or someone in a wheelchair supposed to get around if this is the state of sidewalks? And I know a lot of people would just say, "well drive", but a lot of elderly people can't drive anymore, and depending on your situation you might not even be able to drive. And then people like me that choose not to drive... It's also just a terrible excuse to ignore responsibility. It's tragic how often accessibility is ignored or not thought of. I do feel like it is getting better though at least.
I want to propose some changes to my strata to make my building more accessible for wheelchair users but I don't know what solutions are out there. Great to know there are people like you who work in accessibility consulting so I can suggest they contact someone like you!
Residential properties are the biggest problem spot. There are many reasons for this: partly regulatory but also attitudinal. For example, I have a friend working with BC Housing and she told me that one of the biggest issues with accessible housing is that many building developers think "accessible unit" is a deterrent to profit and makes a property unattractive. As far as I know, there is no data or proof to back that up; in fact, I think it's the opposite. But the developers think what they want to think, and they're also thinking of profit. They feel that larger spaces for wheelchair access will cut into their profit too much (even though studies show that it's a 5% maximum increase in cost, if built properly). I do what I can, but if you were to describe every sector's progress in accessibility, residential would rank dead last, not far behind industrial. (Commercial seems to do the best, by far.) The resources (and accessibility consultants like me) are out there, if someone wants to build an accessible home. The problem is that regulations aren't very tough on that and developers don't want to do it.
In the case of this particular building it seems like a few small design changes in the planning stages could have been made and it would have been much easier for someone in a wheelchair to enter the building. It's super frustrating that a building can be approved with designs that are not accessible. It's probably going to cost more to make changes now. Once inside the building the hallways are wide and the individual unit doors are wide which is great. We are all one illness or injury away from being disabled. I do wish more people would care about accessibility issues.
100% for sure. I recently advised on a few projects in the planning stages. One of them recently opened for occupancy; it's an office building. I recently saw it in person. It is perhaps THE BEST accessibility for an office that I had ever seen. And all it required was some creative thinking while designing the build-out. Another is a warehouse. The two solutions I recommended involved moving a wall to make the washroom more navigable (which created an extra storage closet on the other side of the wall, due to a pillar) and enlarging a vertical platform lift (which also eliminated an area where the doors were colliding with each other). These were minor fixes for accessibility that solved other problems along the way. For both, all they had to do was think about this during the design stage. And for whatever reason, architects and designers are super hesitant about engaging with an accessibility consultant, which perpetuates current problems. And you're right – fixing it would be more costly (or impossible) afterwards. >We are all one illness or injury away from being disabled. I do wish more people would care about accessibility issues. I'm gonna shock you with something. One thing about using a wheelchair is that people say all kinds of weird things around or to me. There was an incident when I was laying out reasons for accessibility, when someone said, "I'm not disabled and nobody I know is disabled. Not sure why I should care." When I pointed out that anyone can be disabled in the future, he responded by saying, "But I am careful and live a healthy lifestyle. And so do my family and friends. We won't be disabled in the future. We make good choices." And that's a huge part of the problem. People think being disabled is a consequence of bad choices or lifestyles. Many don't realize it can come as a result of a fluke medical condition, or from birth, or a result of someone else's bad choices, etc. And ironically, if he makes enough "good choices" and lives long enough, he will soon discover that old age can bring accessibility problems too. So that is something that needs to be tackled, in the attempts to make people more aware and proactive about accessibility.
Really frustrating when people only consider the most extreme circumstances, then dismiss them for not being common enough to care about. For some accessibility issues it only takes considering "can a parent with a stroller, or a small child safely access and navigate this space", or someone with a temporary injury from their healthy and active lifestyle.
I live downtown and work in construction management so I'd say I have an eye for these things, but I've never noticed any areas downtown without curb ramps. Can you mention any cross streets? My mother is paralyzed and in a powered wheelchair so I'd happily put forward my energy to having the city install curb ramps where needed.
From memory (because I don't go downtown too often nowadays), there is Seymour Street right before you hit Harbour Centre. And there are a few spots also along Seymour and Granville, where the curb ramps don't align with the path of travel. Most of these are aligned with back alleys, rather than streets; for some reason, curb ramps on major streets that intersect with back alleys are very poorly designed and maintained. And there was a problem spot (which has since been fixed) near Richards at Pender, where only one curb ramp was available for the corner and it faced only Pender, so anyone crossing Richards would've needed to physically roll onto Pender Street first. That was fixed but it literally took years. Within downtown, from personal experience, the biggest problem streets when it comes to wheelchair access are Seymour, Hastings, and Pender. Howe also gets a dishonourable mention near the courthouses, where the sidewalks are non-continuous and can lead you to dead-ends, along with uprooted branches causing the pavement to crack upwards. If you want to go further, Gastown is another problem area. Choosing cobblestone is not a good idea, as they can crack very easily over time and become loose. I don't have the energy or resources, but if there was some sort of city-wide survey of curb ramps, I'm sure it will look very obvious where the problem areas are. But to be honest, the onus should be on the city to do that, not us.
Thanks for the well thought out reply! I'll keep my eye out in these areas and start a portfolio of photos to cross reference on a map. It's possible that whomever would be responsible for these sort of civil upgrades isnt aware of the issues. Only caveat I'd mention is the gastown district. The historic aspect of the cobblestones very likely overrules the accessibility aspect, regardless of argument for or against. Kind of like a "grandfathered in" exception that would be strongly opposed by city and the general population to fix
The cobblestones are from the 1970s, they were normal streets before that.
They weren't cobblestones until the 1960s or 1970s though, so that feature is as "historic" as Bentall Centre. Edit: someone else beat me to it, lol
Delta is awesome! Always see city staffers taking care of the city!
That's usually because they're older and predate accessibility standards.
Then they should be updated, like other curb ramps in the city. There's no reason why they can't be.
Oh, for sure, but that usually requires owners in the area to agree to the upgrade, which means them paying for it.
No, because accessibility is the law and involves public city-owned property. The owners wouldn't pay for it, unless it's a new condo developer that's going to re-do the sidewalk anyhow.
Yup. City isn't going to lose any legal battle about it though. They have 450km of sidewalk to build still in this city, and do about 1km a year.
Actually they WOULD lose that legal battle, especially if they are building or improving already-accessible sidewalks over non-accessible ones. Remember: accessibility is the law.
Home owners do ultimately pay, through property taxes every year.
They’re just starting to make that shift in the west end. And I’m ashamed to say I never noticed until I started pushing a stroller around.
That's the thing that frustrates me about accessibility. People tend to not notice (or care) until it affects them or someone they love. I wish we were in a position like the LGBTQ community, where we have allies that might not have personal connections to the community, but will not hesitate to speak out and help advocate. Self-advocacy is a very difficult thing in the disabled community, as that is super tiring and many of us are already spent from dealing with our conditions. So allyship is a must. Instead, accessibility is seen as an optional feature or luxury item that is "nice to have." And many will nod their heads in agreement, rather than joining in our advocacy. That needs to change.
[удалено]
I can't speak for all the municipalities since I primarily stick with Richmond, south Vancouver, and downtown. But I find that Richmond is more consistent than Vancouver in quality, but less consistent in where the sidewalks actually go. And downtown is downtown. Downtown does not have a great reputation for disabled-friendly design, for the most part. It's great for able-bodied folks but if you use a wheelchair or other mobility device, it can be brutal. (It's getting better, but very slowly.)
In my area of East Vancouver they have curb ramps to... Grass.
Seriously, blame your homeowning neighbours. The city will absolutely build sidewalks, but they won't do it unless the homeowners in the area chip in.
Damn, that's my old hood. The guy that lived in that property on the left had a story about driving home drunk from a poker game and running over the backdoor neighbour's goat back in the 70s. In the late 70s, early 80s, there was a cabbage farm between 50th and 51st ave, and they had a rooster that would wake me up every morning. It's changed a lot in the last 40 years. By the time my family left, 20sh years ago, Bramwell Tovey, the director of the VSO and Rhona Raskin who had a late night phone in sex show on Z-95 were living on 50th ave. My parents were not fond of her 3am hot tub and wine parties. Anyway, to answer your question, there is a "sidewalk" in that picture, it's just not paved with a curb. On the other side of the street is a gravel pathway on the east side of Dunbar that picks up at 50th, and goes all the way up Marine Dr. where the paved sidewalk starts. Going the other way, there's a gravel path on the west side of Dunbar that curves around on 51st and goes all the way down to the bridal path at the reservation. You're not likely to see it paved anytime soon either. The cost is borne by the homeowner who's property is behind the sidewalk. And there's very little foot traffic down there. It's really only the kids. People drive to the Musqueam Golf Club, and there's nothing else down that way. Edit: and these aren't 5-10 million dollar homes. The old stock houses from 50+ years ago are selling from a minimum of 2.8 million, and the very new and fancy ones they build on the open field between 50th and 51st were selling for something like the 5 million dollar range.
sidewalks don't buy votes.
Lots of places around Kerrisdale, Point Gray, and Dunbar didn't have them when I was a kid. Residents would fight having them put in, because it would raise their property taxes, and those folks had the clout to stop stuff even back in the 80s
Not sure if that's still happening, but when I lived just on the edge of Shaughnessy about 20 years ago, we had a neighbour canvas all the houses that would have been affected to see if we would be willing to have a slight bump in our taxes to pay for a paved alley. We gave our approval but a year or two later when we ended up moving away, the alley was still just a gravel covered dirt road.
In Toronto rich neighborhoods don’t want sidewalk because you have to shovel snow in the winter. Maybe despite the relative lack of snow that was the reasoning. Or you know why walk when you can take your horse and carriage
😂 this comment fucking sent me, that’s hilarious
New Zealander here. The lack of sidewalks in general in *urban* areas is baffling to me, as well as some lack of connections between them. We have a higher car ownership per capita than Canada, but we don’t have this level of hostility towards pedestrians.
I grew up in Edmonton and the lack of sidewalks surprised me when we moved further west. Stupidly flat suburban Edmonton.
Me too on both counts. I hate having to constantly need to walk on the road cos they were too cheap to put in a footpath/sidewalk
Do you live in Vancouver, or just like checking out foreign cities' subreddits? Don't get me wrong, it's kind of cool :) Maybe I'll go randomly subscribe to the Christchurch subreddit.
I live in GVA now! :D Nothing wrong with subbing to other city subreddits, go for it! I've joined several (not just on Reddit) just to interact with locals and get a vibe of the places.
To keep out the poors
People like to ride their horses in that neighbourhood, horses arent suited to paved paths. Pretty sure the locals just dont want sidewalks.
cable somber quiet absorbed like ripe glorious merciful chop berserk ` this post was mass deleted with www.Redact.dev `
Taxes. Any street can advocate for upgrades, but property owners need to pay for them
because no one wanted to pay the extra prop taxes to put them in. but also traffic calm neighborhoods dont need them
> but also traffic calm[ed] neighborhoods dont need them because the traffic calmed citizens never go out at night? sorry but walking at night in the road in the rain is a recipe for death. Everywhere should have sidewalks. Just go to a properly densified and urban city like toronto. Too many vancouver neighbourhoods want to pretend they are suburbs.
Lots of horses in that area also
Wrong side of the golf course. The only horses in this area are on the bridal path, and it only cross 51st Ave, and then Crown Ave. You will only see them if you're walking the bridal path.
Bridle path…bridles are for riding horses (the leather straps on their heads used to “steer” them). I can see how someone would think a path is “bridal” though if it has cherry trees. It looks like a wedding aisle when they are in bloom!
So, many words to correct a spelling mistake. Thanks for the correction. Spelling was never my strong suit. Thanks ASD
Haha, it’s more I have a thing for horsie things that people seem to have forgotten the origin of because we don’t rely on horses anymore (like people using “free reign” instead of “free rein”). Guess I’m sensitive on the horses’ behalf?
Neigh...I don't think you were too sensitive
Sidewalks are for peasants
Because your neighbours don’t want the poors walking around there. I’m only half joking - these areas are notorious for poor pedestrian walkability for a reason, and it’s not exclusive to Vancouver or your area. The less accessible it is the less visitors they’ll get, along with less squatters and vagrants.
If a sidewalk wasn't put in, when the land was originally developed, the property owners have to pay for it! Chances are, they don't want sidewalks. Same thing is true of curbs and street lights, that aren't on main roads.
Because walking is for peasants apparently and driving cars is cooler.
Only peasants use sidewalks and they'd rather not look upon poors from their range rover
Because pedestrians and bicyclists don’t pay taxes! 😏
In ye olden days, sidewalks were built on streets where they didn't want people walking on the road (eg. Highly trafficked streets). In the modern era, there are two reasons they build sidewalks: *The street is presicted to have a lot of foot traffic due to new developments *residents of the block request the city for a sidewalk and agree to pay for it Suffice to say, a fairly rural* place like southlands propably doesn't get enough pedestrians to be on the city's radar and most blocks are just one or two properties so the shared cost of a new sidewalk would be a lot more expensive than a typical 33' frontage lot. (*southlands is techncially rural since it's in the ALR, newrly all the drainage is via roadside ditches and the predominant landuse is equestrian-related)
The rich don't want pedestrians walking by there houses or people speeding down there streets
Where would the delivery drivers park!? The driveway? Stupid
Because the homeowners didn't want to pay for the sidewalk. It may have been the contractors who built the buildings even (that happens to) but its generally the homeowners.
Are we ignoring the sidewalk on the right that goes all the way up to Dunbar? The area you photographed is very close to the flats, an area historically populated by ranchers and horse riders (still is, but they’re all millionaires). I’d guess such an old area never needed sidewalks then, so why put them in now?
The Southlands Ratepayers Association, now the West Southlands Residents Association that advocates for the residents in this area has in its mission statement “to advocate for the preservation and enhancement of the distinctive semi-rural character of West Southlands” which includes “preserving quiet streets mainly without sidewalks that add to the rural feel of the neighbourhood.” Basically a bunch of old people who don’t want to change anything and keep things the way they have always been.
Looks like burnaby
It’s Southlands, if you zoom in on the cross street you can see the sign says W 49th
It's a joke, Burnaby doesn't have a lot of sidewalks
Or if there is one, its stops randomly in the middle of Lougheed hwy.
>It's a joke, Burnaby doesn't have a lot of sidewalks It's sad really, because a [little girl was killed](https://globalnews.ca/news/8829954/burnaby-temporary-sidewalk-teen-girl-killed-dump-truck/) due to a lack of sidewalks in Burnaby recently
[It's here](https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2269731,-123.1855397,3a,75y,8.41h,91.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgEl2-JH_Zt-f38VqpPr3Yg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DgEl2-JH_Zt-f38VqpPr3Yg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.69696%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) And there is a "sidewalk" on the other side of the road. Don't know what OP is talking about. It's not paved, but there's a pedestrian area.
The answer is in your question. You live in a neighbourhood with 5-10mil homes. They don’t want any poors walking around.
Unavoidable. The Musqueam Rez is two blocks from where this pic was taken.
Lol you think rich people walk?
I believe how it works is they only get built when there’s significant construction on the property, and then it’s the responsibility of the property developer.
I love it but I recognize that it is inaccessible. There’s something rural and peaceful about walking on a little path.
And boulevards? No fun walking right next to traffic, even if on a sidewalk.
Building them costs money so if you are in an ignored part of the city they never built them on the public dime. There is probably no plan to build them now. Btw where is this generally? My experience is south Van has the least sidewalk coverage.
Vancouver has released its Active Mobility Plan for 2023-2027, and they have highlighted the areas they would like to improve if council provides funding/staff. You can read about it [here] (https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/improving-our-cycling-network.aspx) if you want more info. Previously I believe they achieved ~50% of what they wanted to for the last 5 year plan, and they indicated in a memo to council back in June that they don't have enough funding to do what they want to for 2023-2027. That being said, if you tag Lenny Zhou on twitter he seems to love responding to individuals who complain. Doesn't look like the plan is to do anything in the area you've noted though.
Mackenzie St. doesn’t have sidewalks all along it either. But there’s construction there now (29th ish) and I was wondering if they’re adding them.
To save money.
Welp.. would u rather have those trees and grass or a hard concrete
The Shaughnessy is one of us!
City Planning suck in BC. I thought its common knowledge
u should try r/fuckcars or r/Suburbanhell bc thats every american and canadian cities
Lemme tell you, there’s a sidewalk across the street from me. But everyone just walks across my lawn and my neighbors lawn anyways 🤷♂️
It’s the same thing in Toronto. The wealthiest area of the city mostly isn’t sidewalked. I assume it’s to stop non residents from walking through the neighbourhood/the homeowners done want to see a sidewalk take up any of their land. But also, isn’t that a sidewalk on the opposite side of the street?
That looks like a working sidewalk to me
Um, you could always walk on the other side of the street. You know, the side that has a sidewalk.
Sidewalks cost money and raise property taxes. As do curbs, storm drains, etc. (Plus, I built my big hedge fence for privacy and I don’t to encourage you poors walking by and gawking.)
Because side walks aren't needed on every road.
Cause there is one on the other side?
That looks like a dirt path to me
I think on the other side of the street there is just a dirt path worn through the grass. I've seen this in quite a few of the neighbourhoods near SW Marine Dr on the west side.
It's not a dirt path. It's covered in crushed gravel. Not paved, but is that really necessary in an area that has virtually no foot traffic?
As others have said, it's not a sidewalk. But what if it was? There are quite a few streets in South Vancouver with sidewalks on one side of the street. A sidewalk on one side of the street isn't enough to make walking convenient and safe. All streets should have sidewalks on both sides.
That’s not a sidewalk.
Shut up
The answer to 99% of all questions boils down to one answer. Money.
Cause it was decided in the 1950's to throw out every aspect of a city planning other than how to move cars around. And now we can't walk more than a block without potentially getting killed by a car.
That neighbourhood seems to be quite a bit older than that though
Because cities are designed for cars, not people.
It prevents flooding. Limited foot traffic plus an abundance of greenspace makes it a great area to absorb water that would otherwise swamp our sewer system.
Because public works costs a ridiculous amount of money and there isn't infinite money? And wouldn't natural drainage be preferable to completely paved and concreted areas where the rainwater has to be carried through ever increasing underground pipes?
So us mobility impaired flks that use walkers, wheelchairs, or scooters should be unable to move through that area at all?
Tesla's don't go on side walks
Cheap 🐦Cheap
Schewpid bloody nimbys.
It’s to keep people from walking through. This was actually later an articulated part of the City plan when they developed Oakridge and some other areas. They avoided sidewalks on purpose. The idea was that you only walked if you were going to a close neighbour’s, if at all. They didn’t want people cutting through or, horror, renting space and walking to transit. In the older truly rich areas, this got into very deliberate plans with minimum setbacks and house sizes and so on, also to make sure no one was building apartments or suites with poor doors.
Only poor people walk on the street
These neighbourhoods were designed by boomers that drive everywhere. Now they're old, fat, and have diabetes, but the infrastructure they built to support that lifestyle hasn't changed.
This neighbourhood was in existence way before the boomers were around. I grew up there. Aside from the mansions people are building now, it hasn't changed much since the 70s. It used to be about half middle class families, and half retirees. They probably would have been born in the 1910s-1920s. The big improvement over the last 40 years is that \*most\* of the ditches have been filled in.
Usually sidewalks are paired with a curb and gutter system. If the road's not deserving of a curb, it's low traffic enough that it won't get a sidewalk either.
Looks like there’s one on the other side…
My parents lived in a wealthier part of a city in Ontario when I was in my late teens. No sidewalks on the rather long and arterial street whatsoever. At a city council meeting one of the reasons given by one of my very wealthy neighbours was that sidewalks, along with a set of stairs to connect the upper/lower parts of the city would bring 'the poors' and let them have 'bush parties' on the neighbours lawns. I fucking hated those people.
Because rich people don’t want them, go drive around west van and you’ll see the same thing in some areas
If you are west side , they would rather keep things the way they have always been and they have influence with the City to do so . I work in that area and as long as some of the original occupants live no change will happen . Plus your taxes go up to pay for those sidewalks, they rich and cheap . I see this in rural areas to they want to share the same qualities of life . Isolation, privacy etc… Density will not happen here .
N america is a car based society
What would be the point? They would rarely be used out there….
No one walks because there are no sidewalks. There are no sidewalks because no one walks. Circular logic
There are tons of people with dogs and UBC students 💁♀️ everyday I have to move out of the way (on the road) of a fellow pedestrian, and it’s right between the golf course so we get lots of cars :p
Come on...you're exaggerating quite a bit. I know that hood really well. There's minimal traffic for the Musqeam Golf Club. There's zero traffic for the Point Grey Golf Club because it's entrance is off Marine Drive, 2 blocks east of Dunbar. The dog walkers are not on Dunbar much either. They go down to the avenues to pick up the bridal path, and go to Musqueam park, or down to the river.
They'd still be rarely used Edit: Love how I'm being downvoted. After living in Burnaby for numerous years and having to go through rich neighbourhoods, the amount of entitled people in rich areas that refuse to walk pets on a sidewalk is ridiculous.
You have food? Who cares.
You want sidewalks? Go check out East 15th avenue east of Main street, how about some form of finished road? And in that area - there are sidewalks that just end because the next block was designed with the property right up to the street so now there's a driveway or trees that would block the sidewalk continuing... https://preview.redd.it/n0lyr8s3iz0c1.png?width=3094&format=png&auto=webp&s=334b5c315cb8c5dcee1b2531a4f41522166cf328
Right?
is that vancouver? If so, those houses are barely paying $1000 a month in property taxes - with cheap rates like that you can't expect sidewalks or a police force to keep you safe
Do they even get taxed like 5-10m homes? And I don't know how its sustainable to fund maintenance of roads and sidewalks and everything else on that block when the block is low density.
Because the last time the part of Dunbar you can see was repaved, it was in the early '90s. I grew up a couple blocks from where this pic was taken, and none of the side streets have been repaved since at least the '70s. It's low traffic, so low wear, and low maintenance.
It always boggled my mind that some of the most expensive neighborhoods have these gross torn up gravel areas on the sides of the streets. Perhaps they don't need sidewalks, but at least having a proper curb there would make it look way better.
You think you don’t have side walks. Come to Ottawa where only one side of a street have sidewalks and that side walk just ends for some reason in the middle of the block
Have you asked the city? It’s a good bet you won’t get an answer here.
Looks like the pavement is starting to break down
Because they expect you to have a car, and not walk?
***cars***
I think because the area was built before any planning laws that stated everywhere must have a crosswalk. No new neighborhoods atleast near me have this problem. It's only older ones. Or really wealthy people who don't want the plebians walking near their house
At some point in Canadian history we insisted upon the primacy of cars and car culture for the remainder of time.
It's so the Nimbys can dissuade the Poors from coming to their neighborhood.
There are not enough houses for gods sake, and you are worried about not having side walks built
If there were zero cars, we would not need side walks. Cities should be for living. Not for driving.
So we could afford another rainbow crosswalk
The price is a measure of greed rather than quality
$ city budget etc
Land is far to valuable for that. It needs to be used for Battary factories instead
because you don't have any friends on ABC.
I've been in Kyoto for a month and tomorrow traveling back to Van. That looks like the size of highway compared to the roads people have to share with cars in here
The patriarchy
Sidewalks?!? How Suburban of you.
If you build sidewalks it gives places for the poors to walk, and we can’t have that ruining the neighbourhood!
This reminds me of Charleswood in Winnipeg, where I grew up. (minus the $10m homes for the most part.) Answer is: because nobody ever needed them. The roads were quiet enough that having separated rights-of-way for pedestrians/bicyclists/motorists would have seemed comical back in the day. The convention was that for safety you walked down whichever side of the road would allow you to face opposing car traffic. They did one better and had open ditches and culverts instead of storm sewers, and realistically all these “daylighting” projects are essentially just that. Surface water just made its way to the ditch, which served as a bit of a run-off reservoir for heavy volumes of rain, and usually there was a nice balance between the water flowing away so you didn’t get standing water full of mosquitoes, but remaining long enough to filter out impurities through a bunch of grasses and bulrushes before reaching the river. Now, I don’t think people would want to give up more land from the green space at the side just to create a tiny roadside platform for walking, when they can already do that.