Instead of nearly $300 million, the proposal that will be put forward to the transportation and public works committee next Tuesday will recommend that between 1.5 and 2.5 per cent of the city's annual capital budget be allocated to the plan, a number that will fluctuate year to year and amount to millions of dollars less.As I wrote in a response to bicycle conspiracist Kerry Diotte, these types of plans should be geared towards average Edmontonians, who would ride their bikes to work a little more often if they felt they weren't going to get plowed over by a motorist or sideswiped by a crazy cyclist.
As a long-term growth strategy for Edmonton it's smart, it's healthy, and it could even possibly cut down the ridiculous amount of traffic congestion that is increasingly jamming our roads.
Bicycle conspiracist? No paranoia here now, is there?
ReplyDeleteAs for why people don't ride their bikes to work, is there any evidence to suggest this? The reason I didn't ride my bike to work more this year had nothing to do with being plowed over it was because the weather forecast rarely promised rain-free afternoons, and that its hard to do a Timmy's run on breaks when the trip takes almost 20 minutes instead of 6.
Even if you can produce some poll indicating any sort of bike support in Edmonton, I still would caution a lot of salt taken before you bothered quoting it. As you're well aware, people polled tend to support increased non-personal automobile traffic measures in the hopes that it will get everybody else off the road, and I suspect bike trail support would work along the same lines.
I hear that Tooker Gomberg's faithful minions are pushing for Toronto's longest bike path, to be named, The Tooker.
ReplyDeleteIf you ever want to put the fear of God into Edmontonians, just mention Tooker Gomberg. Tooker didn't care how many businesses he drove away or how many jobs were lost. As long as he forced his twisted view on everyone else, that was fine. It's similar to today's ECCA shenanigans. Let's find an established and respectable segment of Edmonton's business community and ask them to justify their existance. It's outrageous, almost like a 'purge', and again in the name of sustainability. We don't need the help of bike racks to breed Bolsheviks. They're breeding like flies without any assistance.
I'm not sure about you Dave, but I've been riding a bike around this city for decades and I have no problems getting where I'm going. If you feel a compelling urge to ride along Whyte Ave, Yellowhead or Whitemud, that's your prerogative. I stick to the streets beside the main roads and cross them only when necessary. Never a problem.
I hate to quote Morton, but when he's right, he's right. "Who's gonna pay for this, Sants Claus?" If cyclists want their own exclusive infrastructure built, they're going to have to pay a yearly fee, a licence which will pay for this stuff.
The hardcore enviro-lobby in this city is doing more harm than good. Don't preach to us. We'll each do our own part without being pestered.
Great post, Dave. How much money would the city save compared to the cost of interchanges and freeways along the Anthony Henday? 23Street interchange anyone? $$$$$$$$$$$ for bad planning.
ReplyDeleteBike lanes create a whole new set of problems: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/as-bike-lanes-proliferate-so-do-disputes/?hp
ReplyDelete