News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Somehow, the reversible-lane reinstatement strikes me as the more authentically WTF element than the removal of the bike lanes...

Very much so. It's unfortunate that some people can't see past the bike lanes.

Also, while council may have endorsed in principle a plan for a separate network of bike lanes, I'm very skeptical that they'll actually deliver on much. Sherbourne maybe, but can really imagine the Fords championing the removal of a car lane on Richmond or Adelaide to make way for a protected cycling lane?
 
I think people should write and remind the 'flip' 'flop' councillors who voted FOR the removal and ask them why they all of a sudden have changed their minds (which will cost another 400k?) to do.

This back and forward pushback is rediculous.


BOB RAE for Mayor!
 
Long play?

Marcus Gee today says there is a long play behind the Jarvis hit-job. He says Denzil Minnan-Wong needed a sacrifice so he could credibly justify bike lanes to Ford supporters in an "only Nixon could go to China" sort of deal.

It is possible that similar reasoning was behind the rejection of free public health nurses, so that Premier Hudak can justify increased municipal spending to his Toronto-hating base, or so Harper can justify similar spending on transit and municipal infrastructure. Both can point to Ford's Toronto and say, "obviously Toronto needs this money, because Ford has certainly done his job to keep spending under control."

I have long believed that the City cannot sustain social services and big-ticket infrastructure with property taxes, which are not levied based on ability to pay and do not grow with the economy. David Miller made this argument repeatedly, but he did very little to smooth the way politically such that the province or the federal government could credibly give the city more money. And I regularly slapped my forehead whenever Miller would waste precious political capital on symbolic gestures (eg: Stintz's bags, bottles, and I'm sorry but yes: suburban bike lanes) that a child should have known would needlessly alienate conservative voters.

Jarvis, the Fort York Bridge and the public health nurses did not involve huge amounts of money, and so are a kind of mirror opposite of Miller's symbolic pinko policies. These policies don't cause too much damage, but really piss off the pinkos, who can reliably be counted upon to shriek and fume in that way so satisfying to Ford supporters. This lends support to the "long play" hypothesis.

But scrapping Transit City and incurring over $100 million in cancellation penalties is a big deal, and Ford has yet to produce the federal money he said is coming in exchange for Toronto's support of Harper. On the one hand, as Matt Elliott points out, the City has not actually formally pulled the trigger on the Transit City cancellation, and is not yet on the hook for the $100 million in cancellation penalties. But on the other hand, even if we got the Sheppard subway for free, this overcapacity would still be a massive ongoing drain on our operations budget, the very reason Ford rejected the public health nurses, where far less money was at stake (if any was).

Moreover, the Fords' massively misinformed musings about Waterfront Toronto puts billions of dollars of private investment at risk, which suggests that these guys are making it up as they go along, and when they screw around with downtown infrastructure, it is because they really, truly do despise all those downtown pinkos.

I predict three years of headaches and indigestion as Marcus Gee's hypothesis gets put to the test.
 
Last edited:
Jarvis, the Fort York Bridge and the public health nurses did not involve huge amounts of money, and so are a kind of mirror opposite of Miller's symbolic pinko policies. These policies don't cause too much damage, but really piss off the pinkos, who can reliably be counted upon to shriek and fume in that way so satisfying to Ford supporters. This lends support to the "long play" hypothesis.

Bingo. Right out of the Harper playbook. In the land of spite-based conservatism, it's all about having the right enemies, whose protests can be held up to your supporters as evidence you are sticking it to the 'elitists' or whatever. This is why the QuAIA thing is such a losing issue for the left....
 
Somehow, the reversible-lane reinstatement strikes me as the more authentically WTF element than the removal of the bike lanes...

The reversible lane was the great thing about Jarvis before it was removed. In my experience behind the wheel in the few times I used it in rush hour (heading to my posh, upscale Scarborough condo) that it was a great asset to the City. Like the reversible lane of the Peace Bridge between Ft. Erie and Buffalo, it gives flexibility to traffic planning departments based on traffic flows and time of day. Where is the WTF element? It's a sensible arrangement.
 
The reversible lane was the great thing about Jarvis before it was removed. In my experience behind the wheel in the few times I used it in rush hour (heading to my posh, upscale Scarborough condo) that it was a great asset to the City. Like the reversible lane of the Peace Bridge between Ft. Erie and Buffalo, it gives flexibility to traffic planning departments based on traffic flows and time of day. Where is the WTF element? It's a sensible arrangement.

The reversible lane was ugly, didn't have significant impacts on travel times -- especially compared to a possible arrangement that would have dedicated left-turn lanes -- and made for a hostile pedestrian experience, as noted in a 2005 traffic study. It also resulted in lane widths narrower than the generally accepted Toronto minimum for traffic safety.
 
So now Sherbourne Street is going to become the major north/south cycling street in the east, downtown core but do you guys realize how many people avoid that street at all costs. I personally, have no problems walking or driving along Sherbourne but many people I know do. People are afraid to even drive along Sherbourne Street due to the scary-looking homeless people and the fear of being robbed, car jacked and attacked by a squeegee person. My downtown neighbours are even afraid to ride there, so putting our major bike lane there, might stop a lot of people from using it. I just think it's a bad street to put a cycling lane on, when so many people are afraid to come anywhere near this street.
 
I don't really buy that argument. Well-used cycling infrastructure on Sherbourne would have a gentrifying effect, if anything, adding a lot more eyes on the street.

The greater concern is that Jarvis gets removed and the protected Sherbourne lanes never happen, leaving us with no good north-south route on the east side of downtown.
 
I'm not optimistic that the replacement developments are going to happen. Bike plan costs were targeted in the first KPMG report. Ford campaigned on expansion of the off-road paths as an alternative to using streets, but in yesterday's decisions the proposal to pave trails above the Bluffs was (unlike the changes to Jarvis) delayed for community consultation. I live in this area and walked above the Bluffs the other night. There are posters on the trees and graffiti on the road attempting to consolidate the NIMBY effort. None of the Ford voting block will go against homeowners on something like this. Like many parks and remote nature areas in the city, it is now mostly used as an illegal off-leash dog run by locals.

I'd trade Jarvis bike lanes for protected Sherbourne lanes. I've cycled the paths in Montreal, and wished the whole time that we could have similar infrastructure here. I didn't support the initial construction of the lanes, preferring the streetscape improvements. But if the lanes were the affordable way to introduce traffic calming, if the streetscape improvements were never to be budgeted, then they were a good initiative. The last minute Minnan-Wong amendment allows them to begin returning Jarvis back to an expressway before making the Sherbourne improvements. I see Denzil being tossed under the bus, and his plan for protected lanes losing out at budget time. Losing Birchmount and Pharmacy might be worse than losing Jarvis. Now all the suburban councillors who are unsympathetic to cyclists will be seeking retrenchment of bike lanes in their wards.
 
I hate to say this, but I will. I voted for Ford and regret it. Sorry guys. Removing the existing bike lane does very little to save money. In fact, it's spending money. He also made a campaign promise not to cut services (that he has just going to find more efficient ways of doing it), but it seems like that's not going to work out either. Shocking that a politician lies, I know...
 
I hate to say this, but I will. I voted for Ford and regret it. Sorry guys. Removing the existing bike lane does very little to save money. In fact, it's spending money. He also made a campaign promise not to cut services (that he has just going to find more efficient ways of doing it), but it seems like that's not going to work out either. Shocking that a politician lies, I know...

I appreciate your honesty, actually. There's been the assumption from some in the media that Ford voters will support their man no matter what he does, so it's nice to know that that's not universally true.
 
I may not appreciate streetcars or all of you crazy cyclists, but I can't get behind someone who's considering cuts to things like public parks and emergency services, along with being unable to represent us at events like pride. Live and learn... my vote will be different in the future.
 
(heading to my posh, upscale Scarborough condo)

Posh and upscale used to describe Scarborough? Yeah no.

"Rob Ford: Call 911 to report graffiti."

Will he also ask us to call 911 if a homeless person is going through our trash?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top