[denfromoakvillemilton]

Is everything political for you? Do you even know what you're talking about?

Andrew kind of posts the same comment every single time.

 

[aquateam]

Personally I think that bicycling is a fad and it will go away. The many money-losing bike sharing systems that hardly anyone uses is an obvious sign of this. Riding a bike on busy roads with or without "bike lanes" is too dangerous and most people realize this. Practically everywhere where the bike fad is popular it is easy to get around using transit which is much safer. Many of the "bike lanes" in Toronto where roads were narrowed, such as Dupont, are very underused, and mostly serve to make traffic worse.

I make regular use of the Dupont bike lanes. The runnymede bike lanes, on the other hand, I think are a mistake. I lived in the area and 90% of the time I'd find the cyclists either 1) going the wrong direction or 2) on the sidewalk, even though the bike lanes were there.

 

[typezed]

Riding a bike on busy roads with or without "bike lanes" is too dangerous and most people realize this.

Automobiles are too dangerous. But they're most dangerous for people outside the car than inside of it. Like 7-year-old girls crossing the street. The chance of someone else being injured because you drove your car is far greater than if you had chosen to walk or cycle.

 

[ehlow]

The War on the Car will be glorious. Mark my words, Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard are just the beginning. Soon we'll be expanding LRT and BRT to Eglinton West and Jane and Don Mills. And where there isn't demand for LRT or BRT, we'll still rip up driving lanes for measly bicyclists and bus lanes, just to screw with drivers. Eventually, we'll close entire streets to cars. Do you like driving on Queen or on Yonge? What about the Gardiner? Better enjoy it while it lasts because it won't be long before they're gone. Oh I can hear the screams of horror from drivers and I love it. [Insert sinister laugh]

LOL

Personally I think that bicycling is a fad and it will go away. The many money-losing bike sharing systems that hardly anyone uses is an obvious sign of this. Riding a bike on busy roads with or without "bike lanes" is too dangerous and most people realize this. Practically everywhere where the bike fad is popular it is easy to get around using transit which is much safer. Many of the "bike lanes" in Toronto where roads were narrowed, such as Dupont, are very underused, and mostly serve to make traffic worse.

Yeah it's such a fad. The >100 year old fad

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Cars are the fad. Rising gas prices and congestion will combine to make the driving experience hell. We in North America will pay the price for building our cities auto-centric instead of for people.

 

[ehlow]

Cars are the fad. Rising gas prices and congestion will combine to make the driving experience hell. We in North America will pay the price for building our cities auto-centric instead of for people.

If gas prices really rise a lot then it will actually "solve" congestion .

Many parts of major North American cities are actually well suited to adapt to a scenario where gas prices skyrocket beyond what people can afford, assume transit runs and can pick up the ridership boost.

Many cores of North American cities were not built for the car, they were built before we started building for the car.

Examples: Much of New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Montreal, downtown Toronto, Boston, Portland etc, could adapt to significantly less car usage.

Even LA could adapt as long as they run frequent bus services, they're rapidly improving their system and bus network.

 

[andrewpmk]

Cars are the fad. Rising gas prices and congestion will combine to make the driving experience hell. We in North America will pay the price for building our cities auto-centric instead of for people.

Was there such a thing as a bike lane before WWII when car ownership was not widespread? Subways, trains and streetcars were popular ways of getting around in those days, but I don't think bike lanes existed in those days. Given that taking the train is far safer than driving, and riding a bike is far more dangerous, I don't think that the government should be encouraging people to use an unsafe method of transportation. It makes no sense to waste $150 million putting bike lanes on Eglinton if 98% of the population does not bike to work.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Was there such a thing as a bike lane before WWII ...

No Andrew, bike lanes didn't exist pre WWII. In fact, I'm fairly positive that the concept of road lanes was nonexistant pre WWII. Surely you've seen photos/videos of cities pre WWII?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Who said John Tory doesn't like bikes?

John ToryVerified account ‏@johntoryTO

Great bike ride and conversation with @JaredKolb this morning @cycletoronto #TOpoli #Toronto pic.twitter.com/EEHjgMZecn

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Embedded image permalink

 

[spider]

In terms of spider being afraid that he "won't be allowed to drive anywhere in 10 years", my personal prediction is that traffic will be so bad in the future that people won't even want to drive.

No my friend, Spider's fear is not because of your dystopian view of the future it is because he will be 89 years old, not too many people this age still driving. Maybe justifiably so in most cases.

 

[spider]

An argument could easily be made that the auto-centric culture of the past 50 years was a mere trend and a failed experiment.

I think that this resistance to the auto-centric culture is a recognition that building our cities for the car is unsustainable (both socially and from a transportation point of view) and that we're better off designing our cities for more efficient modes of transport (walking, biking, etc...), like we've been doing for thousands of years.

Yes sir let's all move back into caves, blow up hospitals, schools, hydro, gas and telephone lines. Down with progress and comfort. We will still have our bicycles.

I don't think our ancestors have been riding bikes for thousands of years, cars have been around for over a hundred years not fifty.

 

[ehlow]

No my friend, Spider's fear is not because of your dystopian view of the future it is because he will be 89 years old, not too many people this age still driving. Maybe justifiably so in most cases.

Understood sir.

I wouldn't say my view is dystopian, I just think traffic will continue to get worse in Toronto, which it has throughout my life. The city is growing quickly in population, so I think it's a pretty safe prediction.

I mean, it's not even the future, it's the already happening. Driving along the highways and many other roads during rush hour is already completely gridlocked every day.

 

[nfitz]

No my friend, Spider's fear is not because of your dystopian view of the future it is because he will be 89 years old, not too many people this age still driving. Maybe justifiably so in most cases.

Fortunately we live in a city where the car is not essential. Just got the car back from the garage yesterday (alternator failed) and they had a list of about $1,500 in upcoming repairs (which isn't shocking after nothing major previously on 8-year old car). So it's time to play fix it or trade it.

Sadly i still need a car. Car sharing doesn't work with baby seats, and frequent-enough trips to visit aging parents who selfishly live in the middle of nowhere. But I look forward to the day when I can be car-free, and the freedom that gives!

 

[howl]

I think the problem with many urban critics is they get obsessed by the small details and fail to grasp the big picture. Toronto is a medium sized city in world terms, but it is also one of the fastest growing cities in the world. Certainly one of the fastest in developed world. It could soon reach the echelons of some of the other great cities of the world, not just in terms of population but also in terms of reputation and livability. Assuming we want to reach those echelons, the question before us is how do we get there? Take a look at the characteristic of the largest 50 cities of the world and compare their reputations and livability. What you'll notice is the cities with the best livability are the most progressive when it comes to investing in new ideas and technologies. Cities that are large but are afraid to spend the money on themselves, or are afraid to try new things, often become unlivable slums. If Toronto is going to reach the echelons of the great cities of the world we have to stop worrying about saving pennies or making sure every detail is perfect and start getting stuff done. So what if Eglinton Connects isn't absolutely perfect? An imperfect Eglinton with bike lanes and wide sidewalks is much better than the mess that is there now. If it works it can be the template for other roads. If it fails we'll try a different idea next time.

 

[andrewpmk]

I think the problem with many urban critics is they get obsessed by the small details and fail to grasp the big picture. Toronto is a medium sized city in world terms, but it is also one of the fastest growing cities in the world. Certainly one of the fastest in developed world. It could soon reach the echelons of some of the other great cities of the world, not just in terms of population but also in terms of reputation and livability. Assuming we want to reach those echelons, the question before us is how do we get there? Take a look at the characteristic of the largest 50 cities of the world and compare their reputations and livability. What you'll notice is the cities with the best livability are the most progressive when it comes to investing in new ideas and technologies. Cities that are large but are afraid to spend the money on themselves, or are afraid to try new things, often become unlivable slums. If Toronto is going to reach the echelons of the great cities of the world we have to stop worrying about saving pennies or making sure every detail is perfect and start getting stuff done. So what if Eglinton Connects isn't absolutely perfect? An imperfect Eglinton with bike lanes and wide sidewalks is much better than the mess that is there now. If it works it can be the template for other roads. If it fails we'll try a different idea next time.

If Toronto continues to be one of the fastest growing cities in the world, then Eglinton will be a complete mess. If a few decades from now there are tall buildings all along Eglinton, the LRT will be severely overcrowded. Narrowing Eglinton to 1 lane will make it look like the mess that is Yonge/Bloor (caused by the "pedestrian scrambles" at Yonge/Bloor and Bay/Bloor) and it will be severely gridlocked at all hours of the day, while the bike lane is hilariously underused. Of course, we don't know whether Toronto will grow as fast as it has in the past, because the combination of Toronto's high unemployment rate, terrible traffic and outrageous housing prices might just cause Alberta to grow much more quickly than Toronto. If building partially elevated rail only costs slightly more than LRT and carries twice as many people, why not build elevated rail?