ALERT: Mayor want cyclists' support - Jarvis Bike Lanes

I think one of the things that make Jarvis so appealing is that it exemplifies the trade off of car lanes for bike lanes.

The fact that it has been a 5 lane inner-city freeway makes that aspect all the more rich in contrast to other roads in the city.

Oh, Mayor Miller is our friend now? Right. Hey, re-election must be coming up soon.
Every road re-design should include bikes. Once that was even official city policy.
Now we have to spend our time at every council vote rallying for bike lanes.
The need for safe pasage for bikes has long been established along with everything else
that is great about them ... City Hall has heard from cyclists countless times.

Now it is the time for our elected leaders to do what's right. Vote for bikes.
Everytime.

Note: I will be re-presented by the Bike Union. Join.

As for Mayor Miller, he is not a friend of cyclists. He is a public transit Mayor, which he should be too.
Don't be fooled into believing otherwise.

You don't have to love David Miller, but please realise that he has allowed the following to happen:

-Bike racks to be installed on every bus by this year
-Continuation of the Bike Plan expansion (including bike lanes and bike trails)
-Opening of the Bicycle Station
-Opening of new Bike Lockers at TTC Stations and other locations

and non-cycling specific accomplishments like:
-New accessible buses
-Ever popular Green-bin programme (helping with waste-diversion)
-Proposal for mandatory Green roofs

These might not be all Miller's ideas, but he should still get credit for allowing these projects to happen. Get rid of Miller, and we have people like Denzil Minnan-Wong or Rob Ford ready to replace him. We wouldn't have any transit nor cycling initiatives. In fact, we'd have more cars, and possibly, new highways, since David Miller's worst enemies are big time car-freaks (and openly against cycling). And the environmental initiatives created under Miller could easily be done away as well, since they always complain that the city overspends on these things.

And what's so bad about being a transit-oriented mayor? Doesn't that help people leave their cars at home (and of course, the less cars, the better for cyclists)? And I'm sure if the City had the money, they would also diligently maintain bike trails and lanes during the winter as well, but unfortunately, people like Denzil and Rob would hate new funding allocated for these things, since it raises "unnecessary taxes".

There are two sacrificial lamb angles to this. Jarvis, the bike lane part only, is being put out there to fail. Done so the car supporters can save face and thereby being indebted to the mayor. Pretty far fetched, just putting it out there in case it plays that way.

The other angle is who will be the sacrificial lamb if it does fail. Cyclists will be blamed for not getting enough support for the lane therefore it is their fault. I would be willing to bet on this cause it has happened before. The Mayor's prodigy Giambrone is a master of this tactic.

It will be more fun though to see Jarvis approved.

I don't have a bike locker rented there. So whenever I go to City Hall I park at the racks on the East side of N.P. Square. From Bay Street, cross the sidewalk at the traffic light and go up the wheelchair ramp. Parking is at the top of the ramp.

I should be able to show up. But my question is this: How does anyone know that I'm a bike supporter?

The car addicts have yellow shirts. Do we have anything similar?

The Toronto Star is reporting on this morning's council activities:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/639881

Toronto councillors began debate this morning on a proposal to remove one car lane from Jarvis St., and found themselves surrounded by cycling enthusiasts who had packed the public gallery to show their support for the move.

Residents of Rosedale and Moore Park, who drive down Mount Pleasant Rd. and then Jarvis St. to get downtown, disagree.

Sporting yellow T-shirts saying "Don't Jam Jarvis," they had packed a committee meeting three weeks ago, protesting the proposed loss of a traffic lane.

But the yellow T-shirts were far outnumbered this morning, with only two visible among the solid phalanx of cyclists who had filled the chamber.

...but has anyone heard what the actual outcome was?

they are recessed for lunch and will resume debate at 2:00pm:

http://twitter.com/torontocouncil

On the other hand, the Meeting Monitor says the motion was adopted.

(Link didn't work, but there's a working link to it from the Twitter feed above, as well as a link to streaming of the meeting)

Hi all,

According to Adam Giambrone's Facebook page, updated via mobile 18 minutes ago : "I'm thrilled that Council passed the narrowing of Jarvis and addition of bike lanes.".

Looks like a pass. Congratulations Toronto, another move forward!

Cheers,
Brian

Here's the link:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/639881

After reading the comments on the Star article, I find it alarming that there are so many misconceptions about cycling:
- Cyclists add to/are the cause of gridlock
- Cyclists don't pay to use the road
- Cyclists are the only ones breaking the law
- Cyclists are bullies
- More roads are the answer to traffic congestion

Naturally, these comments make cyclists cringe, but they represent some of the problems that are at the heart of the car v bike debate.

If our government is serious about providing safe, healthy, environmental and sustainable forms of alternative transportation to a growing urban population, then it will need to start doing a better job of educating the general public.

For someone who takes such a harsh stand on bike licensing I am disappointed in your lack of awareness on the subject.

Are you familiar with the concept behind the licensing system soon to be proposed?

Do you know the reasons why previous proposals of this sort have been refused?

Did you even read any of the information provided on this thread? Maybe you should?

I find it difficult to engage any of what you are saying here because is so completely unfounded.