News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5K     0 

And a slap in the face to community consultations. We should just do away with community meetings altogether if the city is just going to do what it wants anyway
 
Perfect timing (for me) to cycle straight on down and see Sugar Beach! The bike lanes on Sherbourne Street are dangerously rough and unkept.
Most of all I hope that this helps tame traffic somewhat.
 
whatever said:
And a slap in the face to community consultations. We should just do away with community meetings altogether if the city is just going to do what it wants anyway
Click to expand...

That's a good idea actually :) Honestly, do a way with them - the majority of these meetings are a complete waste of time, there's always the couple that's opposed to any development whatsoever - could you imagine the meeting for this here, all the outrage of removing a lane for cars.
I'd also like to add this stretch of Jarvis is never that bad traffic wise! - it get's worse north of bloor.
 
whatever said:
And a slap in the face to community consultations. We should just do away with community meetings altogether if the city is just going to do what it wants anyway
Click to expand...

The real slap in the face was to present the proposal originally as a choice between widened sidewalks and extensive tree planting (a la the pre-1947 road widening) or a landscaped central median. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were collected in Section 37 benefits from developments such as "X" to assist in the landscaping. Re-striping the road to allow bike lanes was not on the table or evaluated in the environmental assessment.
 
I'm usually pro cyclist, but this is dumb when there are bike lanes on the adjacent, parallel street! I was pro-widened sidewalks though. Sigh...
 
Roy G Biv said:
I'm usually pro cyclist, but this is dumb when there are bike lanes on the adjacent, parallel street! I was pro-widened sidewalks though. Sigh...
Click to expand...

Imagine a similar pre-1950's comment when discussions (loosely put) about accomodating cars were being had...something like...

"I'm usually pro auto, but this is dumb when there are automobile lanes on the adjacent, parallel street! I was pro-widened streets though. Sigh..."

Just b/c there are bike lanes on an adjacent parallet street...does that mean that's it?! Are we serious about RE-designing a city for ALL modes of transport or are we just going to throw some bones every once in awhile to cyclists/pedestrians b/c the limited urban space dedicated to transportation REALLY belongs to the motorists!

"War on the car"?---->What a joke!
 
You'll now have to travel here to get your reversible lane fix.
 
thecharioteer said:
The real slap in the face was to present the proposal originally as a choice between widened sidewalks and extensive tree planting (a la the pre-1947 road widening) or a landscaped central median. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were collected in Section 37 benefits from developments such as "X" to assist in the landscaping. Re-striping the road to allow bike lanes was not on the table or evaluated in the environmental assessment.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The landscaped median with off-peak on-street parking would've made Jarvis into a great street. Instead it will remain a wide, ugly piece of crap. The things we do for Toronto's most powerful 1%.
 
While watching the news on TV today, I noticed that during the interviews with drivers that there were no passengers. That shows to me that having single drivers driving their 2-tons of metal on the streets of Toronto are a more waste of real estate (roadway and parking) and health than the bicycles.
 
When alien archaeologists happen upon the ruins of Earth and weigh the significance of historical events by the amount of verbiage written, they will surely pin-point this event as the cause of its destruction.

EDIT: On another note, regarding complaints that they should have widened the sidewalk instead of adding bike lanes, that picture reminded me that Jarvis' sidewalks are already pretty damn wide!
 
Last edited:
valkoholic said:
Agreed. The landscaped median with off-peak on-street parking would've made Jarvis into a great street. Instead it will remain a wide, ugly piece of crap. The things we do for Toronto's most powerful 1%.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't improving the pedestrian realm be pandering to the 3% who commute on foot?
 
Jarvis Street during "rush hour" at about 5:25pm. It doesn't seem that bad with the lanes reduced to four.

Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.

 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top