City
Morning Brew: Improve the TTC, Bike Lanes on University, Sex in a Restaurant Bathroom, Condo at 1 Bloor St East, i-Waterfront Coming Soon?, Leafs Win!
Photo: "burkie's poutine dog" by StudioGabe, member of the blogTO Flickr pool.
What's happening in the GTA (and sometimes beyond):
Make the Better Way better says Toronto's mayoral candidates. Hard to argue with calls to improve the TTC, but it's also hard to ignore that George Smitherman, Rocco Rossi and Joe Pantalone have a reason to gang up on the TTC: that might be the way to knock Adam Giambrone (the only candidate not available for comment) out of the race first.
Could bike lanes be coming to University Avenue? City planners are considering it and drivers are already opposing it. Nothing like a bike lane discussion to bring out the friendliest of Torontonians.
Making plans for a special Valentine's weekend dinner and want more than dinner? Head to Mildred's Temple Kitchen. The Liberty Village hotspot is actively encouraging couples to have sex in the champagne bathroom. The unisex bathrooms offer considerably more space - and creature comforts - than those on an airplane, and the effort is condoned by Toronto Public Health ("As far as bodily fluids, it's pretty much similar to the other human functions going on in there.").
Waterfront Toronto is in a bit of hot water and mired in a years-long process of fiberoptically connecting homes and businesses in the West Don Lands. Now they'll have to massage the system to obtain Canadian controlling interest in the communications company poised to create "i-Waterfront". Still, I seem to be missing the point. Why is this worth the hundreds of thousands it has cost thus far?
A condo tower at 1 Bloor East appears poised to rise again, this time to a "modest" 60 some stories instead of the original 80. Bazis International was forced to sell to Great Gulf when Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy crippled Bazis. Barring another global financial meltdown it seems Great Gulf has their Phoenix.
Last night Toronto teams did a role reversal. Featuring a roster of new players was enough to propel the Leafs to a 3-0 win while the Raptors were (temporarily?) knocked off their growing pedestal by the Pacers (130-115). Despite strong performances by the new Leafs - and perhaps some fans beginning work on the next bandwagon - expect the roles to switch back shortly.
Discussion
61 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
Not that Smitherman or Pantalone are much better.. Mini-McGuinty and Mini-Miller are both as useless as they come as well..
We need a change people! Still waiting for a candidate that's not more of the same..
http://jackandcokewithalime.blogspot.com/
Rossi has perked my interest though.
Wouldn't it make more sense to put the bike lanes on smaller parallel streets and make more one ways? Then traffic flow would be unafffected and the cyclists would be safer away from high traffic areaas
In Quebec french fry trucks serve foot long hotdogs and throw a bunch of french fries and spagetti sauce on top and this is called a MICHIGAN.
Also, they'd be stupid not to televise the construction process.
I've experienced it out in Etobicoke where some of the major roads are very bike unfriendly. Sure there are plenty of side streets, but the whole thing makes biking a chore instead of an easy way to get from A to B.
Usually you end up having to do a lot of planning before making your trip otherwise you end up going down a sideroad into a dead end or forced to bike along a very busy and unsafe road because you took a route where two bike friendly roads have no direct connection.
Suffice to say it also takes you longer to get where you want to go and you still end up on the major roads because the places where you're heading are on them. And that portion of the trip can often be white knuckle stressful as the roads were designed without you in mind. Sadly it would often end up with me riding on the sidewalk if there was nobody on it.
Are the clowns in Silly Hall even aware this is the Arctic Tundra we are talking about? I drive Richmond/Adelaide every day and I watch as one hapless cyclist takes 1/2 a lane and traffic tries to squeeze around them. It's just silly.
As usual, the tail wags the dog in Silly Hall.
Sorry, but roads are not owned by drivers. They are owned by everyone.
Bay, University/Avenue Road, Beverley/ St. George, Spadina, Bathurst. I am sure there are some who would oppose bike lanes on all those except Beverly/ St. George. Cyclists and pedestrians have as much right to the road as drivers, and also want a direct route. Most of the non-residentlial places I'd want to go are ON these roads. My stand is there should be separated bike lanes on all 5 of these examples.
Aren't those hickory sticks?
I don't see the value that a bike land on University would bring to moving traffic, regardless of pedal type. A bigger issue is getting people in their cars out of the bike lanes. That would make our lives a lot safer than they are.
Ryan L - you can't compare poor cycling infrastructure in Etobicoke with what's available (and coming) to the downtown core. It's a shame that areas outside of the core aren't considered important enough for bike lanes. Instead of saying a bike lane on University is going to help, you should be saying that more lanes are needed outside of the core. Isn't that a better fight for you than a blanked "all bike lanes are good, no matter what they do to our infrastructure for everyone else?"
I haven't tried Mildred's, and up til now was intrigued by the reviews. I think I'll pass. Having serial sexual encounters happen in a restaurant's unisex washroom is just plain trailer park material. Hope they don't encourage sex in the kitchen, too. Watch out for that mayo!!!
It does seem to me that the location of bodily fluids would be a bit different with Mildred's proposed bathroom activities versus the 'normal' ones.
Guess this might redefine Family Day Weekend.
I'm thinking of going there on valentine's day with my wife and taking an unholy stinky shit
"Donna Dooher"....wow, no shit (or maybe lots of shit)...wonder how many have done her in Mildred's crapper?
So I wonder what distinguishes a restaurant from a gay bathhouse, or even a public washroom. Last time I checked the police were arresting people for public sex.
This bike stuff has gone out of control...
Once they get registered and start paying all of the additional fees that drivers do, not to mention being held to traffic laws and being policed and ticketed (like drivers do), then they can talk about the roads being for everyone..
Until then, they can just 'RIDE' OFF!!
http://jackandcokewithalime.blogspot.com/
Cyclists still pay property tax, income tax and sales tax, most of which ends up in the hands of the city or the province and those governments use part of that money to fund road maintenance and repairs.
In fact, downtown ends up being worse sometimes due to the ridiculous amount of contstruction going on. You can look at a map and figure out the best route only to find out the road you've chosen to taken has its right lane missing and forces you to suddenly share the road with streetcar tracks (This has happened to me personally. I ended up getting off my bike and walking with it because I don't have a death wish)
You also have to deal with more one way streets downtown (assuming you're following the law) and side streets are usually filled with on street parking and the huge potential for door prizes.
You're right though. It's unfair to compare the two. In fact, I'd rather deal with the difficulties out in someplace like Etobicoke than downtown which piles many other challenges on cylists on top of the lack of infastructure on major roads.
Cars damage roads. Bikes don't. Cars pollute the air. Bikes don't.
Cyclists still pay property tax, income tax and sales tax, most of which ends up in the hands of the city or the province and those governments use part of that money to fund road maintenance and repairs.
--------
1 Roller skaters pay property tax. Squirrel wranglers pay property tax. Doesn't mean they're gonna get roller boogie/squirrel wrangling lanes.
That's all I have to say about your ludicrous logic.
2 Cars damage roads? Of course they do. What's your point? At mankind's current state of technology, we have the roads we have that are subject to the wear and tear that they experience. That bikes don't damage roads doesn't have anything to do with anything.
http://jackandcokewithalime.blogspot.com/
What about licensing? Registration? Still want equality?
That's not even beginning on how often cyclists get away with running stop signs, RED LIGHTS, passing on the right. Cuts both ways.
Some cyclists break laws, sure, but some drivers do too. Are you saying that cars shouldn't be on the roads because some drivers don't play by the rules? That's what your logic is implying.
The fact that cars and trucks damage roads *does* apply... because why should my taxes be paying for the upkeep of roads that my chosen vehicle (bike) does not damage?
Why don't you advocate for the removal of sidewalks too? People don't pay a sidewalk tax when they buy shoes, or have to register as pedestrians, or need a walking license. How unfair, eh?
Drivers require licenses and registration because... when a driver makes a major mistake, someone else has a good chance of dying. Licenses require education for operating a car to ensure safety, and registration ensures that drivers can be tracked if they do cause damage or kill someone.
Also, cyclists get can get themselves killed, not to mention anyone in the choas that could ensue. Ever see a LINE of bike couriers run a red (and not a just-turned-red) at college and spadina? I have.
To the rest of your post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument
Don't misrepresent my points, it only discredits you.
I guess my thought here is that if cyclists get to be pissy about drivers, drivers get to be pissy about cyclists. Pedestrians, in turn, get to be pissy about both of the above, who will bemoan the belligerence of pedestrians, and everyone will go on with their lives.
So I don't particularly care if cyclists get bike lanes or not. As a pedestrian it doesn't seem to matter whether they are there or not, you're still in danger from cyclists.
*My* rights as a citizen should not be marginalized because of *their* bad habits.
That would be akin to me saying that all drivers shouldn't be allowed on public roads because a few drivers drink and drive. It's stereotyping.
The Straw Man argument is a good go-to position for people who don't know how to respond to logic. Sorry if I stumped ya. :)
joe on February 3, 2010 at 1:14 P
--------
What planet are you from?
We don't have fu*king taxi meters on everything measuring how much of our society's common goods, services or infrastructure that you use/wear out to determine how much of them your particular taxes should pay for.
It's called living in a fu*king society.
Anyone interested in a proper discussion that doesn't involve people talking over one another or polarizing everything into right/wrong and black/white can find me on BikingToronto.com
And while you're over there with your buddies why don't you discuss other excellent questions like
-Why should my taxes pay for MRI machines that I don't use?
-Why should my taxes pay for powering street lights on streets I don't go down?
-Why should my taxes pay for piping clean water to water fountains in schools my children don't go to?
Some drivers are distracted by talking on the cell phone while driving? Well now no one gets to. I doubt that law is going to apply to cyclists. Our society is filled with rules and laws that are there because a few people chose to be idiots which then affect how everyone else needs to behave. So while you personally may not want to be judged by someone else's behaviour, their behaviour should make sure that the current road laws are enforced. That's what I'm talking about - the law should apply to everyone using the roads equally. It doesn't seem to - it seems to apply to cars, and then other people's personal discretion. (And I'm including idiotic pedestrians here as well as cyclists.)
So if road rules are optional for cyclists then quite frankly I feel no need to be fair about judging any of them. When rule breakers become the exception rather than the norm I'll adjust my attitude.
Whenever there is a car/bicycle collision cyclists are quick to rush to blame the car, because the cyclist takes more damage.
============================================================
Some cyclists break laws, sure, but some drivers do too. Are you saying that cars shouldn't be on the roads because some drivers don't play by the rules? That's what your logic is implying.
============================================================
Why don't you advocate for the removal of sidewalks too? People don't pay a sidewalk tax when they buy shoes, or have to register as pedestrians, or need a walking license. How unfair, eh?
============================================================
..is when it stopped being civil to me. And believe me when I say I could have been a lot more snarkier in my replies.
Someone call the wambulance.
You think you stumped anyone with that blurb? Please, don't think so highly of yourself.
Sorry, but we have a clear case of the tail wagging the dog. I live on the corner of two major bicycle lanes and I am sorely tempted to start a video on YouTube to discredit the bicycle lobby in this town, since even in summer the lanes are hardly used.
And, re. cyclists not being ticketed...I have been ticketed *twice* for going through a stop sign on my bike, which has resulted in a $120 fine each time, plus 3 demerit points each time (note to self: next time pretend I'm a visitor to Toronto! ;). Finally, to other cyclists out there: it really is a bad idea to go the wrong way down a one-way street. I have been involved in a serious accident on a bike caused by another cyclist doing just this. In most cases there's a parallel route in the right direction or alleyway you could use!
No large enough group of people can be accommodated in every way. But we are attempting to do just that. What it will do is create a sub-par solution that doesn't work for anybody, and everyone will be required to conform to it.<br><br>
Let me assure you, a bicycle does not have the same rights as a car. And it shouldn't. And in cases where it does (because it is ill-defined by law), the law should be changed. And a big NO for pedestrians - No, pedestrians do not have the same rights to the roads.<br><br>
I do not mean this as hate. I drive my car about 50% of the time. I ride my bike about 35% of the time, I ride the TTC 10% and I walk 5%.<br><br>
If you have a problem understanding why they don't each have the same rights, look carefully at a pedestrian, then at a cyclist. Then look carefully at a car or a truck or a bus. Eventually it will dawn on you that no, everyone does not have the same rights. And the sooner we accept this, the sooner we'll be able to come up with solutions that work.<br><br>
The war on automobile is not just a war on the automobile. It is a war on freedom. Freedom of movement. In 20 to 30 years' time, we will be told where we can go, how far we can go, and how we can get there. Because we will be limited to walking, or riding bicycles. Public transit will be our only choice, but only to "approved" places. Car will be a luxury unaffordable, unless you're in the top 1 percentile. It is automobile now. Then it will be on to another thing.<br><br>
No, I'm not a paranoid conspiracy theorist. I'm an optimist by nature, but looking at the global picture, you'll understand this is where we are going, and not just in Canada.<br><br>
So what is this equality in every way a path to? Simple. Everyone was equal under communism. But some people were more equal than others. And interestingly enough, many of these special interest groups such as cycling unions have adopted the same thinking and tactics.
I'm sorry, but this is the biggest pile of crap I've ever read regarding transportation in this city. By your reasoning, rights are only to be had if one is in a vehicle. God forbid if I ever need to walk across a street again, right? Since I and millions of other pedestrians need to cross the street once in a while, it should be open season on us because to you, cars will always have the right of way.
The automobile is just one mode among many. When you consider the space that cars require and take up, the automobile has already won. The automobile is the only thing allowed on expressways, right?
Why are people pushing for safer ways to bike, for more transit service? It's because the automobile is horribly inefficient. They cost a lot to manufacture, to insure, to gas up, to accommodate, and so on. Car drivers fail to realize that, when busy periods happen, they are their own worst enemies. Each car takes up a tonne of space, not to mention more than a tonne of weight.
We all have the right to be mobile, but do people seriously forget that driving is a privilege?
It's just sad: to think that 10,000 years of struggle and death and pain can result in - a bicycle lane? Is that what we aspire to? Puhlease! No, it's the social revisonists who are ramming this crap down our throats, with cries of global warming and The End of Oil! Crap, crap and more crap.
Max is bang on: do the advocates of bicycle lanes everywhere seriously want a return to life in the pre-automobile era when most people lived and died within a 50 km radius of where they were born, without having the means or ability to travel beyond that tight circle?
This is about jealousy and forcing others to think the 'accepted' way, like Orwell. I live downtown and can visit Sherway Gardens, Vaughan Mills and my sister in Pickering - all in one Saturday afternoon. What can your bicycle bring you? You'd still be schleping along Queensway, shivering and cold!
This is the 2nd largest country in the world, barely inhabited by the population of Beijing - and we are harping about bicycles.
If it wasn't so insidiously dangerous it would be laughable.