A tale of two communities

Roncesvalles is trying very hard to find the right balance as they re-prioritize their street for pedestrians, public transit, bikes, and delivery vehicles. Roncy is seeing all sorts of ideas being proposed to keep cyclists on the road whilst keeping the streetcar track clear [Ed: read more on the proposed elevated roadway "bump-outs" for streetcars that cyclists can ride over]. At the January meeting many people proposed removing all private motor traffic on Roncesvalles, except for delivery vehicles. Very progressive!

I briefly lived in Parkdale, but I moved to Mimico. And after seeing the difference in the attitudes towards city building, I kinda wished I hadn't.

As part of Transit City, it is proposed for Lakeshore's streetcar tracks to become part of the LRT network.

With any proposed change there will be opposition. What concerns me about this opposition, however, is not the usual arguments about losing on-street parking spaces (which there is way too much of), about the loss of business during construction (a temporary situation), dealing with the actual service problems on the route, the cost/benefit (all of a five minutes savings to downtown), or even that the opportunity for left turns will be reduced, or even that buses would be a better way to move people than streetcars. I am concerned about the opposition, and while the aforementioned arguments have to be addressed, my most pressing concerns are more specific than these usual objections to any public transit improvements.

The opposition have created a "Transit Survey" out to gauge opinion. And here's where where I get really upset.

One only has to glance at the survey to see it's bias against the project. And if that's not bad enough, they are trying to use bike lanes to Lakeshore to help in their fight for the status quo. Why this really upsets me is that these opponents to the transit improvements are the same people who can't bear to have the same parking removed for bike lanes. In other words, these people are not allies to cyclists but would want to "appear" as such if it helped their myopic cause.

As the Roncy example shows, we can find ways to keep transit and cyclists on the same street when we want to. That makes this argument nothing more than a red herring.

Tags:

bike lanes

bike infrastructure

urban planning

active transportation

Comments

zb (not verified)

They're not the same

Sat, 03/28/2009 - 02:45

I would say the difference between the two is not so much the people, as how different the projects are.

I'm as big a supporter of the Transit City plan that you are likely to find. But the lakeshore route is my least favourite one.

The plan for Lakeshore, as I understand it, is to widen the street to 6 lanes (4 traffic plus 2 lrt). Imagine if such a thing was proposed for Roncy. I don't imagine you would approve.

Perhaps the answer is to keep it as the mixed traffic streetcar that it is through the western section of the LRT line. With improvements to the rest of the line, it can make it much more attractive for city-bound riders.

Trikester

Please please please

Sat, 03/28/2009 - 12:27

This would be fantastic.

Between potholes, parking and vehicular craziness I was a nervous wreck by the time I got off Roncie yesterday. I try to take all the potholed side streets around that area and avoid it.

There are probably as many cyclists in Parkdale as there are car drivers. There's certainly more pedestrians including mobility cart users.

The city planners tend to plan for the traffic that drives through here, but not for the people who actually live here.

Go Parkdale!

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

anthony

The difference is...

Sun, 03/29/2009 - 01:24

Several ideas were proposed. Road widening was one of the ideas; it was the one least favored by the planners, and by the commnity.

The difference is more striking than the plan. It's the way the communities are reacting. On the one hand we have most of Roncy looking for soluions, while on Lakeshore too many are trying to simply oppose the plan. The difference in the attitudes is Lakeshore's (increasingly vocal) will to gettison the whole idea, vs Roncy's will to find solutions. And that's the difference I'm trying to highlight.

As long as the city/TTC/et al. are willing to invest in improvements for Lakeshore, let's discuss ideas of what these improvements should look like, which is what Roncy's doing. Instead Lakeshore appears to giving those would-be investors the bird, and could be a huge opportunity lost for Lakeshore.

Many of think that the TTC, through poor operations, is mostly to blame for the indefference (or resentment, and even hostility) towards the streetcars; I have waited for more than two hours on several occasions for a streetcar that never came. We'd like our 507 back. And I think that this is the main reason why some in the community would like to get rid of the streetcars.

But let's not confuse TTC's lack of operational ability with the opportunity that's cold be on the table. And this could be an opportunity that we could shape to suit our community best, like Roncy's doing. I'm simply ashamed of these the folks on Lakeshore who are simply willing to say "No thanks" and walk away from this chance for investment in our future.

Trikester

@antony re: lakeshore

Sun, 03/29/2009 - 13:26

Has someone some creative solutions we could get behind? I'm sorry but my understanding of spatial relationships is limited so I can't understand some of how this works, geometrically speaking.

I love streetcars, too. They're my fav travel next to my trike.

What about a bike lane curbed off from traffic that goes two directions right in the middle of the road, as some countries have?

Then, to go left or right we only have to cross a single direction lane of traffic to side streets. Would that be safer? Like those green park spaces along university but bike lanes? We don't interfere with parking and they don't turn us into door prizes. There'd be no complaints of "sidewalk jumping".

For us nervous types and kids, we can walk bikes across the crosswalks.

Is that plausible?

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Ed (not verified)

Usefulness of these kinds of surveys?

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 12:03

Grimes has not exactly publicised this survey. There's a link on his page, and I guess if you hang around OurLakeshore.net you'd hear about it.

What kind of results do you expect from an unadvertised on-line survey? Will people know what the results are worth and pay attention accordingly?

hamish (not verified)

bump-outs don't work in winter; other details.

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 16:15

Thanks very much for going to the meetign and the detailed post Anthony.
A point I've been raising within this community and process, is that the bump-outs do not work at all well in wintertime as the city is unable or unwilling to actually plow out the indented parking bays, so the cars park ever further out. If the current widths are an indication, it is likely that some of these parkers will impair the streetcar functioning.
So unless the City can demonstrate for an entire year in the core eg. on Spadina, College and St. George St., that it can plow out these indented parking bays and make sure there's enough space left for winter safe cycling, we should allow any more of them to be built.
We should also find out who did that very rough patch job after the trenching the curb lane to bar that company for five years from any further paving contract/work in TO.
As for Lakeshore and transit, we haven't explored using smaller GO trains from the Etobicoke to Union Station area to perhaps save or defer $500M, which should go to the DRL or its study.
And speaking of DRL, one route was on Roncesvalles.
What about putting a tunnel under Roncesvalles from DDW to the five points with one stop c. Howard Park.
And we should also think of whether we could/should put the streetcars near tg the side of the road, and have a bike lane between it and the sidewalk, which might maybe be a bit narrower, leaving the rest of the road to the cars.

Kevin Love

This is a law enforcement issue

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 16:59

As with many other law enforcement issues, this behaviour would come to an abrupt end if Parking Enforcement would use its legal authority to promptly tow away and impound cars illegally parked so as to create dangerous hazards and/or block traffic. Particularly bicycle traffic.

Trikester

@anthony thinking differently

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 19:49

That's part of what I was thinking. If cycle lanes were in the centre then cyclists wouldn't have to stop for streetcars, only at intersections thus making peddling more appealing. Put the streetcars on either side of the double/quadruple bike lanes then cars go behind the streetcars and to the right hand side [if no parking].

A sidewalk snow plow could just go through the centre lane easily then do the sidewalks [or vice versa] on main drags.

Wouldn't it be safer for everyone?

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

The EnigManiac

Centre-positioned bike-lanes

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 22:36

I met with and proposed centre-positioned bike lanes to Adam Giambrone back when he was the cycling committee chair about 6 years ago. He seemed skeptical. I advised that CPBL's have several advantages: they can be cleared of snow by standard plows, there are few grates/sewer covers in the centre, they position cyclists in direct line of sight with the driver and they allow cyclists to be free of the door zone. He was concerned about making turns and I advised that while CPBL's would not likely be practical on streetcar routes, the system that is used on Spadina could be employed for CPBL's when cyclists are making left turns: i.e. a separate traffic light. Right turns are merely a metter of changing lanes, no different than what we do today to make left turns. As much as we are supposed to have left-wing leanings and an alleged progressive spirit in City Hall, they are very old-school and unwilling to explore innovative solutions, so don't expect them to leap at the idea in spite of all its advantages.

AnnieD

Sounds like there are a lot of advantages

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 10:26

I'd probably want separate light signals for both right and left turns if it was a very busy road, but otherwise it sounds great. Do you have any links to examples of centre positionned lanes used elsewhere? Toronto does seem awfully slow to adopt innovative ideas, even when they've been used successfully in other parts of the world. Any ideas of a good place to try a pilot centre lane? Jarvis maybe?

Trikester

@ AnnieD Here's Some Articles on Bike Lanes

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 11:21

http://www.forbestraveler.com/adventure/north-americas-bike-friendly-cit...
http://www.cyclingresourcecentre.org.au/9/Bicycle_network_planning
http://www.globalurban.org/Issue1PIMag05/Montezuma%20article.htm

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

AnnieD

Re: articles on centre bike lanes

Fri, 04/03/2009 - 14:15

According to the Forbes article you linked to, Montreal, the city where I grew up, comes in at #4 of the top 10 cities for cycling. Toronto doesn't even get a mention in the article. sigh

I did find one website that specifically talks about bike lanes in the middle of the road:

http://www.bikexprt.com/bikepol/facil/lanes/midstreet.htm

None of the lanes shown are exactly what I'd pictured. I imagined the lanes with a physical barrier separating the cyclist from the traffic and wide enough for 2-way bike traffic in the lane. I can't imagine kids riding between painted lines in the middle of the street, and that's where I set the bar for bikelane safety. If kids aren't safe riding, then something is wrong. Bike lanes should be created to encourage people to cycle who wouldn't venture out on the road otherwise, not for people who are already comfortable riding, which is why Toronto's bike lanes, often in the door zone of parked cars and not connected to each other, fail so miserably.

Annie

The EnigManiac

Centre-positioned bike-lanes

Sat, 04/04/2009 - 00:05

Funny. I was just discussing this topic with Dan Egan, chief of transportation Services for the city, this afternoon (and have since copied him the articles cited in your post) and he said they weren't really being looked at seriously in the city yet. They had reservations about them. Maybe the photographs and types of CPBL's might convince him to take a second look. I think Davenport would be ideal as it is a feeder route for the city core for the most part, features few attractions for mid-block exits and not many cyclists will make left or right turns off it. Dan seemed to think dooring didn't happen very often but I advised him 90% of the incidents go unreported, but remain probably the number one complaint about our poorly designed current bike lanes. We'll see what happens.

Trikester

@Annie Right on!

Tue, 04/07/2009 - 12:37

The learning curve and kids are a sore spot with me.

As someone who biked and is now triking it's terrifying to be on major unsafe lanes while learning. Yet HOW is one supposed to get somewhere to learn to cycle without bike lanes to get there? How many miles are newbies supposed to push their bikes before they can get on and ride?

Then there's cargo cycles and people who like trailers for children, dogs and groceries. Then there are the disabled trying to get a bit of exercise and get around.

More people would be cycling if they felt safe to do so. The more people that cycle and drive, the better the drivers will be. It works all the way around for everyone.

Tom Flaherty

Big Wheels

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 13:23

The creation of a major arterial dedicated to bikes only would certainly give rise to cycling in Toronto; Jarvis has the potential to take us in that direction.

Taking away lanes from cars seems easier than creating more space for bike lanes, and there is a certain synergy that comes from bikes & street cars; imagine College or Spadina with no vehicles.

I hope I live to see it.

Trikester

@Tom

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 14:48

We can imagine it. Global urban planners can imagine it. I'm not sure the City councillors have that much vision.

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Tom Flaherty

Invite

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 15:39

Why not come to the next Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee (TCAC) on May 11, you may be surprized to find out what is planned for cycling in Toronto in the coming months/years.

Toronto City Hall, 7pm - Committee Room 2

The EnigManiac

That's the problem...

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 18:36

...they plan and plan and plan and talk and talk and talk and have meetings, consultations, assessments and studies and by the time they ever get around to starting anything my son will be a very old man.

I am sick and tired of the bureaucratic BS that is City Hall and it's committees. They need to start doing, not planning

Tom Flaherty

@ The EnigManiac

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 21:26

Of course it takes time to get things done, but I get the feeling that there is momentum building. Careful planning has a lot to do with getting it right the first time, and it is smart strategy - no doubt more could be done, but what is your solution?

Cyclists really need to join to create a unified voice to make things really happen, so lets put our energy behind the TCU and the Ward Groups.

hamish (not verified)

some planning is necessary

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 21:34

Sometimes it's not all that easy, and some planning is necessary. But that said, there are some major gaps in what's done here, as there's not the political will to provide the needed continuity, especially at intersections, and I have strong reservations about the City's ability to provide safety on curves eg. eastbound Wellesley, east of Jarvis.

The EnigManiac

Of course you plan...

Tue, 03/31/2009 - 22:21

You've got to plan. Sheesh! You don't just jump headlong into anything without some planning. But do we have to plan and study and assess for 10 years to get one kilometer of a bike lane on a secondary street? Ridiculous. City Hall is so entangled in red tape and fear of losing any voters and protecting their own precious little kingdoms, they can't make a decision. Sure they can vote on anything that saves money or makes money, but nothing that saves lives or makes sense. I'm just fed up with their inaction.

What do I suggest? I'll tell you. Develop a vision and sell it. Get everyone on board or at least the majority of your council and the city. Guarantee the timelines. Study a particular issue in a reasonable period of time, say a month, perform the assessments at the same time, come back and make a decision within a week, allowing for a limited number of challenges or ammendments and then you get going on it the following week. That way the project can get completed when it needs to be, not 10 years later.

They need to have their priorities in order and their priorities at present are purely self-serving, not public-serving. They have no vision and no clue how to get things done. I hoped Miller and his gang would come up with a socially-responsible, environmentally-responsible and progressive plan for the progress of the city, but they have proven to be complete duds. Hell, Lastman---a Conservative---achieved more for cycling than Miller has.

Trikester

On City Hall Committees

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 13:52

They need to have their priorities in order and their priorities at present are purely self-serving, not public-serving.

I have to agree with EnigMatic on this one.

Having been to countless homeless/poverty committees in the past 10 years that have spent millions, if not billions of taxpayer dollars in this province/city with demmed little to show for it other than doodles on my presentation notes.

I have utterly no faith in the power of politically based committees. HAC is a case in point. How much money have they spent to do nothing? How many activists have wasted their time with presentation after presentation since the Golden Report came out?

Committees are powerless to make policy changes. All they can do is present watered-down, inoffensive recommendations.

If I see one more self-serving media charade about another committee on poverty I am going to woof my cookies.

Don't get caught in that dichotomy if you really want a city that respects cycling and non-automobile culture.

What do I suggest? I'll tell you. Develop a vision and sell it.

Precisely.

Stop letting bureaucrats and politicians define the visions of the citizens. Let the CYCLISTS define the dream.

I have respect for Critical Mass because one day a month they take the streets. They don't beg, whine and although some may sit on committees, once a month they SHOW their power to take the street. Do you all know how inspiring that really is? Even a cyclist pulling up for a bag of Fritos is bound to wave.

Why don't we get serious like the no-car Sundays in Kensington? They didn't 'committee' that to death. The citizens of Kensington TOOK it.

Why are we begging our own elected officials to do the right, environmentally friendly thing? THEY are the public servants. We don't owe them anything other than their more-than-adequate paycheques. We don't work for them. They work for us.

As Cicero said, "Either the people are the slaves of the government, or the government is the servant of the people."

How soon do you think it would be before there would be bike lanes if hundreds of cyclists "flash raided" the major arteries of Toronto during rush hour one day a week? How quickly do you think they would move on legal bike lanes? How seriously do you think they'd take cyclists then?

What would have happened if the feds, instead of supporting GM which, by it's very nature, lives in the past and must go down unfortunately, that money was diverted to non-gasoline dependent infrastructure and job creation? How fast do you think decent bike lanes and e-vehicle registration would happen then in major cities?

Why are we begging for crumbs from the vehicular table? Gas vehicles are not sustainable. Cycling and e-vehicles are.

The theory of a successful movement is very simple. It's two-fold.

First the radical elements [anarchists, Black Panthers, AIM etc] demand change by direct action. This forces the state to deal with those who are moderate or be subject to losing their power over the citizenry or using overwhelming force--an untenable position for a government claiming to be a "democracy".

In this case, direct action cyclists TAKE OVER the roads while the moderates fight for bike lanes. Yet, both agree most of the time about the dream they share. They simply disagree on tactics and support the outcome, regardless.

It's the history of social change 101.

[thanks enig. longer version available on blog]
HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Tom Flaherty

Kids in the Hall?

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 23:57

Trikester,

Activism is one way to make the case for change - I couldn't agree more - and CM rides are a good example of that.

The TCU, TCAC and CM all play a role in affecting positive change for cycling in Toronto.

It's easy to slam government bodies, and sometimes it is deserving, but you're generalizing here. TCAC is made up of a diverse group of volunteers and City staff - and I've been encouraged by what I have seen lately.

If you refuse to participate or engage in TCAC that's fine, but your opinions of it become purely subjective as a result.

The EnigManiac

That's unfair Tom

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 12:01

Once can only an express an opinion about any organization if they are a part of it? That is awfully elitist, don't you think? And maybe more than a little defensive.

I can know all about an organization, any organization, their successes and their faults and can express them with authority without being intimately involved with them. So can Trikester.

Often, we hear about organizations and committees and clubs and associations, but never hear what they accomplish, if anything. What they stand for, advocate and strive to achieve may be admirable and noble, but its results that matter, not rhetoric and promises.

Tom Flaherty

Fair

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 15:31

EnigManiac,

To clarify, I feel that it's unfair to judge something without taking the time to familiarize yourself with it first. At least read the meeting minutes, be in the audience at a meeting, or know enough to offer specific, constructive feedback.

TCAC is supported by volunteers, in my opinion that's a more just cause than unfounded criticism.

Trikester

Accomplishment

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 13:45

but its results that matter, not rhetoric and promises.

Thanks Enig. Succinctly put.

That's my point right there. I know one particular organization that was horrid, waste of money and time. Then I started hearing the opposite. What was the difference?

One driven guy, I happen to know, had joined and made it move almost single-handedly within months. I was wowed. He pulled together other like-minded people now something actually was being done.

He got results. Something that hadn't happened in years with this group.

Talk is cheap. Results count.

It's not about ego [although we all have one!] it's about getting something done. One doesn't have to be on the inside of an organization to see if something is happening.

It's obvious.

And when I can ride on either side of Roncy and not skid through potholes I'll wave and honk at TCAC and anyone else who was part of the process.

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Trikester

@Tom

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 13:33

Tom I've been doing activism for 30+ years. I know how City Hall works. And the province. And the feds.

Whether you like it or not, not everyone is going to agree with you. Nor are they going to agree with your group or anything else.

Being patronizing that your way is the only way, or that everyone else "couldn't possibly understand" is exactly how groups working towards the same ends, wind up splitting apart when working for the same goals. Saying in the next breath "I agree with...." doesn't cut it.

Without the direct action contingency, as I explained about activism, committees are utterly powerless because when it comes down to it--the government does not change [just like most systems] until it is up against a wall of resistance.

Nowhere did I say one word about TCAC. What I spoke about was the failings of committees at City Hall to get anything done in a timely manner.

If we want bike paths and safer cycling then we are going to have to ride straight down the middle to that goal regardless of who hogs the road and who is trying to "negotiate" with the City. If anyone is in this for the glory of being the "group/person" that actually won the battle--they're in it for the wrong reason.

What I don't SEE anywhere is the goal. You were almost there when you talked about doing many bike lanes at once. What I am NOT seeing is how many and where and what is the most practical kind, right now.

That's why I agree with EnigMatic. Decide WHAT you want, what is acceptable, what is not. If you don't, City Hall will eat you alive and waste your time and energy on mickey mouse concessions.

Don't base that on what the City is willing to placate cyclists with, base it on what the necessary future of this city is.

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Tom Flaherty

HONKA the good HONKA

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 14:55

OK, so TCAC isn't a powerless, dichotomy that presents watered down recommendations - phew, you had me going there.

When I hear people comment negatively about any of the many aspects of cycling advocacy I wonder if it doesn't simply work against the positive energy that has been created; and if you weren't then fine.

I think I was pretty clear that the TCU, TCAC and CM all play a role in affecting positive change for cycling in Toronto, but I apologize if I sounded patronizing.

For the record, I am not a member of TCAC, but I am a member of the TCU, and I've been on CM ride before.

Trikester

DaHoodies & Alternative transportation

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 19:08

OK, so TCAC isn't a powerless, dichotomy that presents watered down recommendations - phew, you had me going there.

I don't know whether TCAC is, or isn't working specifically since I'm new to the politics of cycling.

What I DO know is that the amount of bike lanes and how they are being misused by motor vehicles hasn't changed much in the past ten years since I cycled a lot. Yet, there are far more cyclists, now.

Something is not working and we need to look at why.

Now, from what I read of Toronto Cyclists Union they are against e-scooters and such. Perhaps that's a small, vocal minority or perhaps it's a general feeling from what they put out in forums/blogs/posts online.

Now I live in a neighbourhood where alternative vehicles are becoming more common. And I'm glad. We're used by other neighbourhoods as a drive-through and cheap parking lot, who don't care that we need cheap transportation ourselves and better public spaces.

I'd like to see all of these, plus e-cars and sustainable energy sources become accessible and affordable.

We're also one of the politically feistiest neighbourhoods with thousands of bikes, in Toronto. Battles with the government are commonplace and we get a few wins:-)

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Darren_S

Onus not on cyclists

Thu, 04/02/2009 - 17:59

Countless cyclists have gone to TCC/TCAC meetings have done a fair bit of banging their head on a wall. How many years have cyclists asked the TCC/TCAC to get a coordinated effort to deal with enforcement of bike lanes. I remember a meeting almost ten years ago where the question was asked and all we got was spin. With anything, if you fail the people they will bail on you. Would you shop at a grocery store if you had to spend 3 hours in line each time you wanted to buy a few items?

The onus is on TCAC to engage cyclists. They refuse to leave the comfort of their downtown meetings to engage anyone outside of the core. If they are looking around a meeting and only see a dozen or so people from a city of 900 000 cyclists they need to get the message.

Trikester

@ Darren

Fri, 04/03/2009 - 10:40

You may be onto something there.

Perhaps there needs to be cycling groups in each neighbourhood that come together as a larger group, less often.

Outreach is an integral part of any group. Has this been planned for?

Obviously, something needs to get moving.

There are possible direct actions that can be taken to enforce the use of bike lanes. That would however, require that people be willing to get out there, as our neighbourhood did about the lake crossing, in yellow vests with caution signs and such and make it happen in the public eye.

Cyclists on foot could hand out "tickets" to drivers or human chain the bicycle paths to make the point. There's a number of eye-catching possibilities that could be used. I'm sure some creative folks could come up with some good brainstorms that include sunny days, music, dancing, posters and waking up the neighbours.

If anyone's really going that direction in Parkdale or nearby--I'll be more than happy to film you all:-)

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Tom Flaherty

The Zone

Fri, 04/03/2009 - 11:17

Yes, there needs to be cycling groups in each neighbourhood that come together as a larger group, less often.

The TCU has followed this model of community engagement, each Ward in the City is a separate group, each with Ward Captains or Co-Captains that organize locally.

Building support for cycling at the neighbourhood level can influence and direct the political process, which in my opinion is the best way to bring about lasting change.

vic

Ward groups

Fri, 04/03/2009 - 11:18

The Bike Union has sub-groups in each ward, with a "ward captain".

Some ward groups have been pretty active, others not so much. I hope this ward group idea keeps growing, and the groups get more active.

Are you a member? Maybe you can get something organized in your ward?

Trikester

On City Hall Committees

Mon, 04/06/2009 - 10:07

They need to have their priorities in order and their priorities at present are purely self-serving, not public-serving.

I have to agree with EnigMatic on this one.

Committees are powerless to make policy changes. All they can do is present watered-down, inoffensive recommendations.

If I see one more self-serving media charade about another committee on poverty I am going to woof my cookies.

Don't get caught in that dichotomy if you really want a city that respects cycling and non-automobile culture.

What do I suggest? I'll tell you. Develop a vision and sell it.

Precisely.

Stop letting bureaucrats and politicians define the visions of the citizens. Let the CYCLISTS define the dream.

Why don't we get serious like the no-car Sundays in Kensington? They didn't 'committee' that to death. The citizens of Kensington TOOK it.

As Cicero said, "Either the people are the slaves of the government, or the government is the servant of the people."

Why are we begging for crumbs from the vehicular table? Gas vehicles are not sustainable. Cycling and e-vehicles are.

The theory of a successful movement is very simple. It's two-fold.

It's the history of social change 101.

[thanks enig. longer version available on blog]
HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Trikester

@Enigmatic & Spam?

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 14:08

I had the short answer here and the long one on my blog but I got caught in the spam filter for some reason.

Trikester

Oh Thanks I've been de-spmmed!

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 15:01

Thanks moderators! That was quick!

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Trikester

<snip>

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 15:04

double post, apologies

Trikester

Getting it Right

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 15:26

@ Tom
*Careful planning has a lot to do with getting it right the first time *

The error in that position is that it leads to political paralyzation. There is no "right the first time". There is only the best possible outcome given the present situation. Errors will happen and everyone will learn from them.

One does the best one can with the information at hand and moves forward. Politicians will use "perfection" as a an excuse to do nothing because there are no perfect solution to any problem.

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

Tom Flaherty

Moving Forward

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 20:38

Trikester,

Perhaps some elaboration is in order.

The City has the authority to implement bike lanes without getting permission from the respective City Councillor, although I believe City Council still has to vote on these things.

My understanding is that the current strategy works something like this:
1. Get general support and agreement for specific projects, like the creation a bike lane - and move it through Council;
2. Ensure that these projects get the required approval from the various groups that manage our roadways before taking (and paying to get) things to the design phase; and,
3. Managing the process to ensure there is a balance in the projects being done, and those planned (e.g.: putting in several sections of bike lanes at a time rather than the sporadic hiring of contractors to put them in gradually).

The system is not perfect, but there's more to it than you may assume. I would encourage you to go to the TCAC meetings and form your own conclusions. Acting in the best interest of cycling in Toronto is all about giving your time and effort.

Trikester

@Tom Thanks for the insight

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 21:11

(e.g.: putting in several sections of bike lanes at a time rather than the sporadic hiring of contractors to put them in gradually).

That makes sense to me.

Acting in the best interest of cycling in Toronto is all about giving your time and effort.

Activism is my 'specialty', not sitting in meetings and committees. When folks are somewhat decided on what they want/need or what direct actions might accomplish that goal--that is where I can support their efforts.

Committee meetings would be someone elses' specialty and best served by making decisions then looking to what can be done to 'make that happen'.

HONKA! HONKA!
http://trikester.wordpress.com/

The EnigManiac

I'm not saying...

Mon, 04/06/2009 - 10:07

...never plan. Sheesh! But do we have to plan and study and assess for 10 years to get one kilometer of a bike lane on a secondary street? Ridiculous. City Hall is so entangled in red tape and fear of losing any voters and protecting their own precious little kingdoms, they can't make a decision. Sure they can vote on anything that saves money or makes money, but nothing that saves lives or makes sense. I'm just fed up with their inaction.

A tale of two communities

Comments

Search

More ads