Posts: 2,402
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
48
A much more balanced story in Kitchener Post:
http://www.kitchenerpost.ca/news/neighbo...c-calming/
[/quote]
Not insinuating that notmyfriends' comment was unbalanced or not based in reality, but you're right that the Kitchener Post article seemed biased. One outspoken resident cited anecdotal evidence that cyclists "represent less than 5 percent of traffic on our street," and the city councillor pointing out how a non-scientific poll conducted by a resident who has a set agenda might be less than trustworthy, and a citizen advocate pointing out that the level of traffic doesn't justify four lanes, and that available street parking is under-subscribed.
Posts: 10,274
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
295
(09-06-2015, 04:55 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (09-06-2015, 12:29 PM)notmyfriends Wrote: The part that's missing here is that, having grown up in Forest Heights myself, never ever ever ever have I seen that street with solid parking on both sides. Hard to imagine having parking on only one side even coming close to inconveniencing someone in a measurable way. It's a nonsense complaint.
A much more balanced story in Kitchener Post:
http://www.kitchenerpost.ca/news/neighbo...c-calming/
Just to be clear, I was not implying that notmyfriends was biased, but rather I was comparing the Kitchener Post article to the original letter in the Record.
Posts: 278
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
5
I was just commenting on one component of the complaint that was getting attention here, but wasn't really based in reality. I have no comment on whether or not the project should happen. Seems like it would make the street nicer, though, which alsomakes the locals complaints puzzling.
Posts: 10,274
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
295
Maybe the people complaining are worried about bicycle gangs terrorizing the neighbourhood?
Posts: 278
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
5
(09-07-2015, 05:05 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Maybe the people complaining are worried about bicycle gangs terrorizing the neighbourhood?
Posts: 1,094
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
57
Anybody know what's up with the "Infrastructure Installation" on King St E, in front of Freeport? I remember seeing lane closures listed there for a 6-month period, but I've got no idea what the "infrastructure" might be. There's some on King E just on the opposite side of River Rd as well, but not sure if it's related.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
They built some kind of pumping station opposite Freeport Hospital, so I'm guessing it's a poo-pump and they upgraded the sewer tubes as well.
Posts: 6,468
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
85
(09-10-2015, 04:00 AM)GtwoK Wrote: Anybody know what's up with the "Infrastructure Installation" on King St E, in front of Freeport? I remember seeing lane closures listed there for a 6-month period, but I've got no idea what the "infrastructure" might be. There's some on King E just on the opposite side of River Rd as well, but not sure if it's related.
They renovated and expanded the pumping station there, did they not?
Posts: 6,468
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
85
The Margaret Ave bridge is scheduled to re-open on October 2nd.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.3221239
Posts: 10,274
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
295
That's great news! With all the current closures for the railroad crossings, this will definitely help.
Posts: 262
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
22
(09-06-2015, 04:55 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (09-06-2015, 12:29 PM)notmyfriends Wrote: The part that's missing here is that, having grown up in Forest Heights myself, never ever ever ever have I seen that street with solid parking on both sides. Hard to imagine having parking on only one side even coming close to inconveniencing someone in a measurable way. It's a nonsense complaint.
A much more balanced story in Kitchener Post:
http://www.kitchenerpost.ca/news/neighbo...c-calming/
Nonsense complaint or not, a lot happens when you fill a council chamber. I was there, and I pointed out the fundamental flaw in arguing to keep unused parking at the expense of other uses. But it hardly matters when that gets drowned out by other speakers. Numbers matter, and there was a real decorum problem among the people attending as well-- something that, sadly, one of the councillors was happy to play to.
In this case, policy and balancing public vs. private use of the roadway space withers in the face of a vocal opposition. The direction has been set: is there room for two lanes of parking, and bike lanes? Well there is, but it's going to squeeze everything. Instead of having buffered bike lanes that would have been comfortable and safe for people on bikes of all ages, we'll have dooring lanes. And I'm sure someone will argue that the dooring risk isn't really there because you can go for long stretches without finding any parked cars. Someone actually did argue that we don't need to worry about bike lanes next to parked cars because there are so few parked cars, as an argument for keeping parking!
So if you don't like this state of affairs, and if you want to call it a nonsense complaint, I'd suggest that you start telling Kitchener councillors your opinion because whether it's nonsense or not, it's going to carry the day.
And it's going to have an effect on other streets in Kitchener, too. Union Ave residents are watching and taking notes. These folks are quite happy to portray this as a waste of money (despite the very low cost of a paint solution-- East Ave was done to this template for $20K) and are attacking bike infrastructure so that we aren't talking about what this really is: maintaining private use of public space at the expense of public need.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Bike people want bike lanes. Car people want car lanes. It's never going to change. Yes you can voice your bicycle opinion but when it's a minority, what do you expect?
Posts: 1,227
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
31
(09-10-2015, 10:55 AM)Canard Wrote: Bike people want bike lanes. Car people want car lanes. It's never going to change.
This frames the issue the wrong way. There is no such thing as "bike people" and "car people" each of their own tribe fighting against each other. This view is promoted by people who benefit from the status quo and use it as a divide and conquer strategy.
Reality is that most people own a car and choose to cycle some of the time, either themselves or one of their family members (e.g. kids, or on the weekends for exercise, or occasional trip downtown, etc).
I'm mostly a driver nowadays, but I still want safe biking lanes for my kids, university students, for recreation, etc.
Posts: 10,274
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
295
(09-10-2015, 11:36 AM)BuildingScout Wrote: I'm mostly a driver nowadays, but I still want safe biking lanes for my kids, university students, for recreation, etc.
Same for me.
Posts: 1,084
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
31
Depending on any number of factors, in the past 2 weeks, I've gone to work (approx. 4 km from home) by foot, bus, bike, and car with the option of car-pooling available too. The lines between the types of people are blurred and the reasoning why they choose one mode over another at a specific time varies as well.
Sure, car typically is king in the suburbs, but car people and bike people are not mutually exclusive.
|
