Pete Fry

For Vancouver

Tag: community safety

  • Vancouver’s slow journey to slow speeds for side streets.

    Vancouver’s slow journey to slow speeds for side streets.

    UPDATE – The motion passed unanimously!

    Tomorrow, the City of Vancouver appears set to approve new by-laws for 30km/h limit on local residential streets. Nearly six years since this — one of my first motions — passed at City Council and UBCM; again unanimously when I brought it back in 2024; building on work of local/global Vision Zero active transportation advocates.

    If this motion passes (and I believe it will) it will mean that all residential streets (without a centre line) across Vancouver will be slowed to impact-survivable speeds. The challenge will remain around signage as it related to enforcement . While the by-law changes speeds city-wide, enforcement and likelihood of charges will be predicated by zones and streets that are clearly marked. Nevertheless the law as it is written means residential side streets city-wide are slowed.

    The timing wasn’t serendipitous –after years of fighting for this change, sadly the recent tragic events of April 26 have underscored the fragility of human bodies relative to thousands of pounds of fast moving steel and rubber. May their memories be a blessing .

    Here’s what I wrote back in April 2019

    Safer slower streets: 30kmph residential street pilot

    On a personal side note, I became involved in local community advocacy and ultimately civic politics after my close friend and good neighbour Paul Tynes was hit by a speeding minivan while he was walking across Prior Street. He suffered a traumatic brain injury and months in hospital and the neurological trauma ward. The long term impacts of those injuries ultimately claimed his life.

    The idea of slowing speed limits down could be elaborated upon in a more detailed blog post but there’s lots of evidence to support the why, and articulated in #VisionZero work being done around the world. The gist of the ask, take the 80% or so of residential roads in the City (defined by lack of a centre line), lower the speed from the default 50km/h to 30km/h for improved livability, more comfortable public realm and drastically improved survivability in the event a pedestrian is struck by a car.

    #VisionZero residential speed limit improvements have been implemented in Seattle, Portland, and in cites across North America and Europe.

    Building on work done by the previous Vancouver council and advocacy by local governments across the province at Union of BC Municipalities, this motion tackled one of the roadblocks (no pun intended) the province threw at this work by way of the Motor Vehicle act – which effectively mandates to change the speed limits the city would need to post signage on every block of every street. This motion flips the ask that the province amend the MVA to allow us to set our own city-wide default speed limit (and conversely post higher speed limits on select arterials as necessary). The motion also makes provision for local pilot areas.

    UPDATE This motion passed handily at Council and went on to pass after vigorous debate at UBCM. To date, the province has not given local governments the ability to set default speed limits.

    WHEREAS

    1. Currently, the BC Motor Vehicle Act stipulates a speed limit of 50 kilometers per hour within city limits.

    2. The probability of pedestrian survivability is about 90% if struck by a motor vehicle travelling at 30km per hour, survivability is reduced to 20% if struck by a vehicle at 50 km per hour.

    3. Today, Vancouver has 30kmph limit on designated bike routes, in school and playground zones and along a portion of Hastings Street, however a blanket speed limit reduction would require changes to the MVA, or significant signage and roadwork by the city.

    4. Lower speed limits are more compatible with active transportation, and creating safer, better engaged, and more inclusive communities.

    5. In 2012, The City of Vancouver’s Pedestrian Safety Study identified that mixed mode roadways, allowing for shared use of space by motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists without lane assignment (for example Granville Island) serves to reduce speed limits, while improving public realm, social connectivity, and increasing active transportation.

    6. In 2016, The City of Vancouver endorsed Vision Zero, an international framework and project that prioritizes road traffic safety over speed or convenience and emphasizes that the responsibility for safety is shared by transportation system designers and road users.

    7. In 2018, as part of their position paper, Modernizing the BC Motor Vehicle Act the British Columbia-based Road Safety Law Reform Group recommended: “A default provincial speed limit of 30 km/h for local (no centre line) streets should be included in the MVA, with municipalities enable to increase speed limits on local streets in a case by case basis by bylaws and posted signage.”

    8. In 2018, the provincial government’s B.C. Community Road Safety Toolkit recommended lower speed limits in downtown areas and residential roads.

    THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED

    THAT Council re-affirm the City’s commitment to Vision Zero, and a street system with no fatalities or serious injuries involving road traffic.

    THAT Council direct staff to develop a pilot 30kmph speed limit demonstration project, focused on mixed mode use, reduced speeds, and complimentary road design with a mechanism to record and analyze before and after data.

    THAT Council direct staff to identify a local street, area, or areas within the city to pilot a 30kmph speed limit demonstration project and report back with implementation strategy, timing, and budget as well as proposed road design changes by Q3 2019.

    THAT Council submit the following resolution along with above preamble (articles 1, 2, 4, 7, 8) for consideration at the LMLGA and presentation at UBCM: “Therefore be it resolved that the UBCM lobby the province to change the Motor Vehicle Act to a default speed limit of 30kmh for local streets with municipalities enabled to increase speed limits on local streets in a case by case basis by bylaws and posted signage.”

  • The Aftermath of April 26 – Healing will take time, thoughtfulness, and intention.

    The Aftermath of April 26 – Healing will take time, thoughtfulness, and intention.

    CONTENT WARNING Talking about the event that unfolded after the Lapu Lapu Festival on April 26, when a deranged motorist murdered at least eleven people with his SUV.

    It had been a little over two weeks since I had been at the site of the Lapu Lapu Festival, in and around the South Hill neighbourhood and John Oliver High School. Today was a beautiful warm sunny day, just like it was on the day of the Lapu Lapu Festival.

    The Festival, a celebration of Filipino pride, culture, and resilience, had taken place on a beautiful sunny day spanning several streets and parking lots. Music, laughter, dancing, happy crowds, and food created a buoyant, lively atmosphere for blocks. I had too much fun, ate too much street food, but did manage to line dance with some lolas and introduce my colleagues Sean and Lucy to my favourite sweet snack, turon. I had left the festivities that afternoon for another event, only to return later that night on news that mass casualty event had taken place.

    The trauma of that evening came in many forms. Of course, first and foremost the immediate victims, the survivors, and the first-hand witnesses – by the time I had arrived blue and red and white lights were strobing every surface, the last ambulances were leaving, firefighters with faces dulled in shellshock, police were taping off the streets, one was crying. A baby, a small child had been killed. I was crying. Ashen-faced volunteers marshalling amidst sequestered city buses to triage witnesses . Emergency rooms are overwhelmed at all regional hospitals. Our city and the world recoiled in horror and sadness.

    How do we collectively recover, how do we individually recover? Two weeks later I’m here walking with survivors from that night, neighbours living within a block of the site at East 43rd between St George and Fraser where Kai-Ji Adam Lo deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people. We are walking slowly, the mom’s leg is in a brace from where the SUV struck her. She was separated from her son when they were hit, he was thrown and concussed. The dad shared his terror running from home to the scene to find his family. They all survived.

    We walked along the block of 43rd past rows of stacks of flowers, flags, candles, teddy bears and toys, framed photos, wooden hearts, Filipino flags, mylar balloons. Markers dangle on strings attached to plywood sheets festooned with messages of hope, of sympathy, of love, of grief, of shock, of resilience. A deep growling muscle car roars by and we all flinch nervously.

    The folks that live here, the thousands of young people who attend John Oliver, the local business community. Inevitably, once the flowers have wilted and the and the rains have smeared the cards into inky streaks, when the memorial has been packed up, we will need to reconcile this physical space in a meaningful way.

  • REVEALED Mayor’s Plan to freeze new supportive housing in Vancouver

    REVEALED Mayor’s Plan to freeze new supportive housing in Vancouver

    Last month, Ken Sim told the “Save Our Streets” group he’d propose freezing new supportive housing in Vancouver. Residents we’ve spoken to are concerned about the ABC party undermining non-profits and punishing the vulnerable. Their motion dropped today.

    Sim’s motion, up for debate on February 25, has been revealed. Its new title, “Temporarily Pausing Net-New Supportive Housing Investments,” is less harsh, but still harms vulnerable populations by denying any new supportive housing to meet growing needs.

    Read full text of motion:
    https://council.vancouver.ca/20250226/documents/pspcmotion3.pdf

    The softening of mayor Sim’s motion is a response to the public’s strong backlash to freezing all supportive housing across the board, and shows his backroom machine may be listening, yet still it punches down on some of society’s most vulnerable: the homeless.

    Supportive housing is subsidized housing with on-site supports for adults, seniors and people with disabilities at risk of or experiencing homelessness. Sim’s revised motion will freeze City contributions of land or funds specifically for homelessness response supportive housing.

    Sim’s less-bellicose, revised motion includes exemptions for health and recovery, women and families, seniors, and youth ageing out of care. Curiously, there’s also an exemption that allows for (net-new) density added to replacement supportive housing sites.

    Nonetheless, ABC’s message is quite clear they would like the homeless problem to go away – and by that either to future as-yet-unfunded replacement housing, or preferably to another city. Beyond the callousness of that intention with regard to our fellow humans – there are four big problems.

    First, back when the City of Vancouver regularly conducted homeless counts, data showed most street homeless were once permanently housed here before circumstances found them unhoused; not by choice, and not coming from elsewhere as often suggested.

    Secondly, despite purported intent of public safety and quelling street disorder, the absence of housing with support for folks at risk of homelessness will only exacerbate the desperation and chaos for unhoused folks in an increasingly hostile city. I don’t believe this will help public safety.

    Thirdly, we are collectively entering a time of profound economic uncertainty and housing precarity – things aren’t getting better for a lot of Vancouverites and many are “one paycheque away.” Rather than saying no, we should be looking to make supportive housing better.

    Lastly, injunctions to evict encampments (Strathcona, Oppenheimer, CRAB) were inevitably overturned because courts (under Charter Sec. 7) ruled homeless campers had nowhere else to go. In past we could call on Province to do their part, but now we have abdicated our role? Seems fraught with issues.

    Let Sim and ABC know unhoused Vancouverites matter too. We want public safety and decent housing for everyone. We can and should do better, but as other cities in the region are taking Ken’s cue to cancel supportive housing, this bad policy will only hasten worse outcomes.

  • Local State of Emergency Declared in Vancouver

    Local State of Emergency Declared in Vancouver

    Today Vancouver City Council declared a Local State of Emergency. This will give our Emergency Operations team (led by City Manager, Deputy City Manager and our Fire Chief) powers to react more swiftly to issues as we need to keep our city safe: ie shutting down unsafe situations, thwarting hoarding and price gouging, procuring emergency supplies and even temporary expropriations.

    We also approved fast tracking of Community Service and Social Policy grants that we had granted earlier this month so that we can help communities help communities faster during this crisis.

    Both of these emergency resolutions passed unanimously and with full support of the mayor and council from across political spectrum.

    Massive thanks to our incredible city staff who are working hard to mobilize a massive response to a rapidly changing situation. Also massive thanks to the leadership of our mayor and the rest of city council working together on this response to such an unprecedented crisis for this time in our city.

    These are difficult and challenging times, and especially working across jurisdictions, disciplines, populations and neighbourhoods – but together we will survive and thrive!For those who may have read my earlier post about what Emergency declaration means – today’s declaration is slightly different from a State of Local Emergency under Section 13 of the (BC) Emergency Program Act as this is a declaration under Section 173 of the Vancouver Charter – the key distinction is that we don’t have to check in with the province and we don’t have a 7 day expirey/renewal

  • Considering a Local State of Emergency

    Considering a Local State of Emergency

    The City is preparing to declare a State of Local Emergency.

    While that sounds scary, it’s no reason to panic. SOLE is a legal tool that allows us to shut down risky establishments, mitigate price gouging & hoarding, and keep our City COVID-safe. We are doing this in order to provide priority and flexibility to our emergency management teams and first responders. In particular this gives us the city extraordinary powers to keep our residents safe and in this case limit the transmission of COVID-19 and help to flatten the curve.

    A State of Local Emergency is valid for a period of seven days and must be formally reconsidered prior to extension. The official decision will come from council tomorrow in an emergency meeting. I’m attaching an official BC Emergency Management brief here, it might provide a helpful understandingStay safe, stay strong Vancouver ✊🏽

    https://www2.gov.bc.ca/…/guidelines-declaring_a_state…