Reduced sidewalk riding fine & cycle paths

On Sat, 08 May 2004 15:05:27 GMT, "Doug Purdy" wrote:

Check out Jan Wong's article "All thos cycle paths" in today's Globe and
Mail Toronto section page M3 or at
http://www.globeandmail.com

Try:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040508/WONG08//?query=jan+wong

"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

"The pedestrian committee, a kinder, gentler group, actually supported
the cycling committee in cutting the fine. Asked why, Rita Brooks, the
pedestrian co-chairwoman and a non-cyclist, hesitated. "It was sort of
the lower-income argument. But that's not very good, is it?"

"The cycling committee holds sway over a $72-million bike plan that will
change the face of the city. That includes doubling the number of
cyclists in Toronto within 10 years by ensuring everyone lives within a
five-minute ride of a network of 1,000 kilometres of bike paths"

A self-fulfilling prophecy.

More evidence that the greatest threat to people who wish to ride
their bikes to go somewhere or who wish to ride above 5 km/h and don't
desire dodging and weaving around 3 year olds on tricycles is the
so-called Cycling Advocate.

In article ,
Chris B. writes:

A self-fulfilling prophecy.

More evidence that the greatest threat to people who wish to ride
their bikes to go somewhere or who wish to ride above 5 km/h and don't
desire dodging and weaving around 3 year olds on tricycles is the
so-called Cycling Advocate.

I dunno. A $50 fine can still sting. But the ostensible reason
(the roads getting more dangerous) doesn't quite sound 'right'.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

(Tom Keats) wrote :
I dunno. A $50 fine can still sting. But the ostensible reason
(the roads getting more dangerous) doesn't quite sound 'right'.

Exactly - the appropriate response would be to hike the fines for
speeding, red light running, or aggressive driving.

-Steve

10 May 2004 12:00:10 -0700,
,
(Steven Goodridge) wrote:

(Tom Keats) wrote :
I dunno. A $50 fine can still sting. But the ostensible reason
(the roads getting more dangerous) doesn't quite sound 'right'.

Exactly - the appropriate response would be to hike the fines for
speeding, red light running, or aggressive driving.

Increased enforcement would do more than raising a fine no one pays
because they're not cited for the infraction.
--
zk

Chris B. wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2004 15:05:27 GMT, "Doug Purdy" wrote:

Check out Jan Wong's article "All thos cycle paths" in today's Globe and
Mail Toronto section page M3 or at
http://www.globeandmail.com


Try:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040508/WONG08//?query=jan+wong

"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

"The pedestrian committee, a kinder, gentler group, actually supported
the cycling committee in cutting the fine. Asked why, Rita Brooks, the
pedestrian co-chairwoman and a non-cyclist, hesitated. "It was sort of
the lower-income argument. But that's not very good, is it?"

"The cycling committee holds sway over a $72-million bike plan that will
change the face of the city. That includes doubling the number of
cyclists in Toronto within 10 years by ensuring everyone lives within a
five-minute ride of a network of 1,000 kilometres of bike paths"


A self-fulfilling prophecy.

More evidence that the greatest threat to people who wish to ride
their bikes to go somewhere or who wish to ride above 5 km/h and don't
desire dodging and weaving around 3 year olds on tricycles is the
so-called Cycling Advocate.

Agreed, we already have a network of routes to use on bicycles. It's
called the streets and highways of where we live.
Best regards, Bernie

city council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from $90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Since the old fine of $90 is 80% more than the new fine of $50, does
that mean they think the roads are now 80% more dangerous than before,
or is it simply that the life of a cyclist now worth $40 less than before??

What a load of horse-manure.

On Sat, 08 May 2004 23:58:31 -0700, LioNiNoiL_a t_NetscapE_D 0 T_NeT
wrote:

city council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from $90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Since the old fine of $90 is 80% more than the new fine of $50, does
that mean they think the roads are now 80% more dangerous than before,
or is it simply that the life of a cyclist now worth $40 less than before??

What a load of horse-manure.


Do you ride here?

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario

A mukluk wearing troll wants to know:

Do you ride here?

I was riding there twenty years ago, when your mukluk was still on the seal.

On Wed, 12 May 2004 18:39:04 -0700, LioNiNoiL_a t_NetscapE_D 0 T_NeT
wrote:

A mukluk wearing troll wants to know:

Do you ride here?

I was riding there twenty years ago, when your mukluk was still on the seal.

So was I. BOth in deepest suburbia and downtown. I went away to other
parts of the country for eleven years, and then came back. Congestion
and driver's manners and habits had changed a great deal in the
interval.

It's a giant pinball game out there. Sometimes I'm up for playing
(Queen Street is fuuuuunnnnn) and sometimes I'm not. Then, the Humber
River Trail, that runs by my front door, looks pretty good.

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario

On Sat, 08 May 2004 19:22:16 GMT, Chris B.
wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2004 15:05:27 GMT, "Doug Purdy" wrote:

Check out Jan Wong's article "All thos cycle paths" in today's Globe and
Mail Toronto section page M3 or at
http://www.globeandmail.com

Try:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040508/WONG08//?query=jan+wong

"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

"The pedestrian committee, a kinder, gentler group, actually supported
the cycling committee in cutting the fine. Asked why, Rita Brooks, the
pedestrian co-chairwoman and a non-cyclist, hesitated. "It was sort of
the lower-income argument. But that's not very good, is it?"

"The cycling committee holds sway over a $72-million bike plan that will
change the face of the city. That includes doubling the number of
cyclists in Toronto within 10 years by ensuring everyone lives within a
five-minute ride of a network of 1,000 kilometres of bike paths"

A self-fulfilling prophecy.

More evidence that the greatest threat to people who wish to ride
their bikes to go somewhere or who wish to ride above 5 km/h and don't
desire dodging and weaving around 3 year olds on tricycles is the
so-called Cycling Advocate.

Most cyclists in Toronto, who are not riding on the paths are riding
in traffic. _However_, (and I say that knowingly - I live here, and
get around in the city as a pedestrian, a cyclist and a driver)
Canadians, particularly those in southern Ontario, are much more
aggressive on the road than fifteen years ago. I'm sure that visiting
Americans have noticed our free interpretation of speed limits.

There are sections of suburbia, both in city limits and in the
surrounding muncipalities where I would not ride on the road in peak
volumne traffic. The roads are designed (and used) as six lane high
speed arterials - there is just too much difference in speed to bike
safely. I'm thinking of Dixie Road in Mississauga, from Eglington
north toe the 401 and north of the 401 to past Derry Rd. Cars
routinely travel at 100kph,, and there is no shoulder, just curbs. I'm
also thinking of the Queensway from Kipling to Dixie Rd. Massive
volumne, a highway interchange with a 400 series highway, a
destination shopping mall and a mushrooming group of outlet malls.
Lots of cars travelling at highspeed, then braking and turning.

On these sections, I soemtimes ride on the sidewalk. It's just safer.
I'd rather not bounce a hundred metres down the road. Pedestrian
traffic is very light.

Downtown, OTOH, is a different story. Due to daytime congestion, bikes
can move faster than cars in many neighbourhoods. Here, they belong on
the road and only the road. In fact, if I'm riding the trails on the
weekend, I make a point of doing so early in the morning, before the
majority of the dog walkers and families with kids are out. The parks
get heavily used after 10 am.

Shiirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario