Liveable communities take away my rights

Got into an argument with another person in a different internet forum.

His basic schtick was:

He didn't want his tax dollars spent on designing or changing his community to make it more liveable. Meaning he didn't want money spent on cycling infrastructure, more transit which the latter he never uses.

This is what he said to me :confused: :

Quote:

---

I know your plan. Provide (cycling) and mass transit free benefits. Then remove parking spaces. Its damn hard to have a car... if there is no place to put it. This is done with the full wisdom and knowledge that if government subsidies poverty... they create it. Soon the percentage of the population that can even afford cars... or the freedom to travel about will dwindle.

Then whatever the powers-that-be decide should be the price to move about.. will be the price. In your plan for the good people of Canada... in thirty years they will need a cycling license, another license for the bicycle, a toll ticket for the government provided paths and lanes, and a bicycle parking permit.

Restrictive social class governments that seek to limit the abilities, imaginations, and freedom of expression and movements of its people has always created refugees. We will welcome your refugees. Thank god... America has Detroit.

---

Basically government intervention, planning and legislation just sucks for him. That cycling to him = poverty/less monied folks

I guess that guy hasn't seen how much most cycling gear costs...
But of course, it would be hard for someone who is so car-centric to understand why a person would choose to ride a bike to work, or want a liveable community.

Ahhh...yes, thank god for Detroit. 'Cause they sure didn't cost the American public any money. :rolleyes:

What a tool.

Ask him to cite specific examples where creating great cycling infrastructure has created poverty. i'm pretty sure it is the opposite. I think living in a culture where big industry is subsidised (as it bloody well is in the us!) creates a population indentured to those industries (like car manufacturers).

IMHO, I'm not sure if it's possible to have a rational conversation with this person, much less a reasoned argument.

A few months ago, I was appalled during an orientation session for new employees (I work for a municipal govn't), the most senior ranking government manager who welcomed us, after asking how many people took local transit (bus, light rail), said that we "had to balance use of our money" and not focus so much about transit.

He justified his remarks, by saying he took transit himself 1-2 times per week. Then he said as a car driver, he didn't want all his tax dollars for transit.

Over 40% of the new employees in that room that he welcomed, took transit daily to get to work. There was approx. 30 employees in the room. (The city has 14,000 employees on the payroll. Yea, freakin' huge employer.)

While yes, one has to balance city budget-spending priorities, the context of even making such remarks by him (earning the highest salary of all bureaucrats in the city), it felt like a slap in the face for us in the room.

good luck changing his mind...
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_h...duty_calls.jpg

The man obviously has no idea of the fact that his "rights" come with a price, a price that may be a bit too high and is often paid by other people. With great power comes great responsibility, isn't that the phrase?*

But people have always complained when the world moved forward. When women got the right to vote, when the slaves were freed, you bet there was someone griping about how this was personally unfair to them.

You could tell the guy that he's welcome to travel as much and as far as he wants, as long as he's not poisoning our common atmosphere or endangering anyone by his speed and mass. Tell him you know someone with a really nice recumbent for sale ;)

I'm not violently anti-car, honest, but it should be fairly obvious that a car-based society has many drawbacks and that encouraging people to cycle more can only be a good thing.

*and where do I have it from anyway? Probably LOTR :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irulan

good luck changing his mind...
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_h...duty_calls.jpg

---

You found my favorite! :)

I'm not sure how the highest high mucky-muck of my current employer feels about cycling/mass transit. I do know how my co-workers and even some middle to upper level management feel about my riding.

When I ride or walk to work some are interested in active commuting for fitness or even to save money. I forget where I read, maybe here on TE that the average person saves $7,000 by going car free, or down to one car if a multiple vehicle family or just "car light".

I agree with NbyNW that it's not possible to have a rational conversation sometimes. Choose your battles. You have the right:

To be the first generation of kids who'll die younger than their parents due in large part to poor health/nutrition.

To have health care costs being the largest cause of bankruptcy.*

To waste days, weeks, months ... years of my life commuting to work, stuck in traffic.

To waste " " looking for parking.

For small, local businesses (which may benefit most by livable communities) which actually generate the most jobs to be squeezed out by mega box stores who may benefit most by traditionally suburban/freeway style of planning. Look at this plan here in the Bay Area:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news...nclick_check=1

"O'Brien said ... the trail -- which would cut through five BART stations -- would run by some of the most densely and underrepresented areas in the county. He said an economic benefit could be felt by the countless small businesses near the corridor, as well as larger retails centers like Bayfair Mall in San Leandro. Additionally, O'Brien points out, the trail could improve pedestrian and bicycle access to other transit hubs, including Amtrak or AC Transit connections."

I've shared my bike lane with motorized wheelchairs, people using walkers. We need to remember that bikeable/walkable communities are accessible communities and work with them.

*woops, I forgot. You're Canadian and don't have to pay for health care ;) :rolleyes:

IMO, it depends on how the design and layout are. There is a town about an hour and a half from where I live that redid one of it's main roads to add a cycling lane. Great on the surface, but horrible in how they did it. They have angled street parking. They put the cycling lane between the lane of traffic (for vehicles) and the parking spots. Everyone felt the cycling lane should have been between the parking spots and the sidewalk as it would have been less danegerous for the cyclists. (This is a beach city that has many inexperienced vacationers renting bikes).

Shootingstar, do you need some journals to support your argument? Cities is a good one.
Tell him to read Jane Jacobs

I think another one would be the healthy cities program by the Australian Heart foundation..

I'm off swimming but i'll think of a few more.

Interesting, Trek about small businesses benefitting from cyclists as customers. They are the ones at least in Vancouver, who strongly have objected to bike lanes running by their stores, ec.

Actually CC, for the first guy I mentioned, who feels his rights are impinged, is a cyclist. Believe it or not. Just so wierd how people can get twisted in their thinking.

I'm disappointed by the senior bureaucrat...he's not that much older than I but obviously in a different planet. been in govn't as he told audience for last 25 yrs. of his career. Hard to listen to dinosaurs in my own age bracket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shootingstar

Interesting, Trek about small businesses benefitting from cyclists as customers. They are the ones at least in Vancouver, who strongly have objected to bike lanes running by their stores, ec.

---

Sorry about that. Those particular business owners may have been misinformed. :(

http://www.bikeleague.org/blog/2011/...n-mississippi/

"Even with all of this, the greatest economic development impact of the Longleaf Trace is yet to be experienced. Downtown Hattiesburg suffered an exodus of retail businesses in the mid 70’s with the opening of the malls. With most buildings sitting vacant for 2 decades, historic downtown Hattiesburg is beginning to be revitalized with restaurants, art galleries and music venues. Investors have now purchased several of the larger buildings to turn into housing that will cater to the 16,000 university students."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trek420

Sorry about that. Those particular business owners may have been misinformed. :(

---

A multi-use trail in Hattiesburg is an entirely different matter from a bike lane in cities. Trust me: I've been to Hattiesburg, and there is plenty of parking.

Some business (mainly small retail) are in fact hurt by bike lanes that take away parking. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have bike lanes; it's just the reality of crowded streets and conflicting needs.

I suppose that if a family saved $7,000/year by going car-light/free, than much of that $7,000 might be spent in local mom & pop stores that were accessible by bicycle.

I agree with PamNY. There is a philosophy out there that proposes that everything bike/ped oriented is good for business. I think that may be true in certain situations, but I don't think it's proven to be universal.

ETA: withm, I don't think that's a fair assumption. Mom and Pops in my town tend to be specialty oriented and not providing the basic staples of life in a quantity or variety necessary to support the shopping needs of a family. I'm happily going to ride my bike to Kroger and WalMart

Overall, I bristle at arguments in support of cycling being disguised ways of supporting the anti-big box/anti wal-mart debate. Whole Foods and Trader Joes are just another form of big box...they're just perceived differently...

Shootingstar, show him what the EU plans. Wonder what he will think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PamNY

Shootingstar, show him what the EU plans. Wonder what he will think?

---

Surprisingly long list of communities already doing the car-free thang :cool:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by withm

I suppose that if a family saved $7,000/year by going car-light/free, than much of that $7,000 might be spent in local mom & pop stores that were accessible by bicycle.

---

They could spend it at Walmart for all I know. It's a $7k raise. :) Do what with it what you will ;)

A coworker just bought a house in Tracy, a tough, crowded, hour-long commute from our mutual office. She felt she could not afford a home closer. You kidding? In this market? Anywho add the miles, wear tear on the car, time ... it's almost like buying another house.

I think most people whether they drive or bike would like to do at least some errands by foot or on a bike. Most people want liveable communities even if they drive often.

Thanks for the link, Pam. Gives some ideas...not just for the strange yahoos, but for other related cycling stuff.

As for cyclists as customers for economic viability. For specialized stores, we have to be abit realistic about this: if the retailer sells small kind of products, then it's not the sort of thing tons of cars are lining up all the time unless it's a bakery or some essential, perishable thing that one visits weekly. I mean shoe store, jewellery store...aren't the type of stores that people buy from several times per month. So there are times, that I think some retailers are just struggling anyway because: they haven't refreshened their marketing strategy, their products are specialized, etc.

For big box stores and big shopping malls, well now about some bike racks. I could never forget the time, we biked up to bike store I think it was in Seattle or was it Portland (?) about 2 yrs. It was at a large shopping mall: No bike racks. So we wheeled in our bikes into the store. I remember this because I did buy 1-2 things from the bike store.

But there were other types of stores for shopping at that mall. Hardly encouraging cyclists to shop even though we will shop at big box stores when we need the merchandise/pricing.

This is an experience I've had quite often at shopping malls..with big chain grocery / other big box stores. Not all, but enough.

and then there is the obvious point that I as a homeowner with a working husband with whom I share a car, pay exactly the same homeowners fees (which pay for local roads),police and fire support, taxes, both state and federal (of which a portion pays for roads and infrastructure) and gasoline taxes for the one car we do use, which also help pay for roads and infrastructure.

This point seems to just sail over the heads of those who object to me sharing the road. I don't pay any less homeowner fees,state and federal taxes for using one less car than other people, although I do pay less gasoline tax. On the other hand I will probably last longer than most of them at least from a healthy life style point of view.

The retailer complaints in Manhattan tend to be very specific to the individual stores' circumstances. In most cases, their customers don't arrive by private car, but some are affected by bike lanes nonetheless.

A deli does a lot of business with taxi drivers who stop quickly for a cup of coffee (and probably double-park). Some delis cater to taxi drivers by letting them use the rest room (a huge issue for taxi drivers). With a bike lane, that very stable chunk of deli business is instantly gone.

One bike lane narrowed a street so much that tour buses supposedly avoided the area. Restaurants and souvenir shops that cater to tourists claim to be hurt (which seems plausible to me).

Delivery trucks (which nearly always park illegally, but at least they can park) are another issue when parking space is lost.

The equation in Manhattan is a bit different because bikes don't mean "one less car" -- they mean one less person on the subway, which doesn't matter very much. I don't know how relevant our bike lane battles are in other places.

None of this is an argument against bike lanes -- just a bit of reality.

If you're interested, this is a story about one very controversial bike lane (the one that discouraged tour buses).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marni

On the other hand I will probably last longer than most of them at least from a healthy life style point of view.

---

I always want to point out to them that I am helping keep med. ins. premiums lower...then I want to ask what their blood-work, BP, and resting pulse looks like and if they smoke. :p

I just found the item i wanted to suggest.

Towards an eco-city:calming the traffic. David Engwicht http://www.angusrobertson.com.au/boo...affic/4257287/

http://www.creative-communities.com/

I'm probably not going to win any popularity contests by saying this, but I don't support the recent development of bike lanes in Vancouver. I believe it was poorly planned, and does not benefit many people. It may encourage some people to commute by bike, but only for those who work in that particular area. None of the funding went into bettering or expanding beyond that downtown core.

And might I also say that it does not make commuting downtown any better, as it only goes N/S E/W in two respective lanes, it won't help if you need to go to another street. Getting back onto the bike lanes are sometimes dangerous, if not impossible. Because a lot of downtown traffic is still one-way, unless you want to go the wrong way risking a ticket, you have to go on streets that doesn't even have a bike lane. You're still not any safer than you were before.

They spent over $25million to build just TWO bike lanes. They could have easily spent that money to build better infrastructures that benefits everyone in the city, not just a tiny fraction.

I'm in support of bettering infrastructure that everyone can benefit (not just a few people); this one was poorly planned and ill-spent.

I think I went off a tangent a bit, but I wanted to hi-light that not all bike lanes are created equal.

No, not bike lanes are created equal. The 2 Vancouver separated bike lanes, of which parts are show in this 2011 Vancouver video clip below, run through the thickest part of Vancouver downtown traffic. Not the entire length of the 2 routes, but parts. As one can see, in the video, the city actually used some low cost methods.

Cost of construction for roads, usually is manpower, redirect traffic, etc.....a blend of unionized and probably contract folks. I guess, I'm saying this now after having worked closely with documents on detailed contracts, cost modelling, etc. on a major road and bridge construction project @ $800 million out in the suburbs for 3-yr. long project.

It's just a start, badger. Cycling infrastructure isn't built after there is a whole pileup of cyclists overcrowded for several years. It's before. Just like the Golden Ears Bridge which is Vancouver's first toll bridge road, it is seriously undertutilized, by thousands of dollars annually. Part of it is car drivers take time to change their driving routes and suburbs will get built up with more local residents.

Similarily for cycling, if there is both public education, promotion and reasonable cycling infrastructure, people will use it. Like bike rack use on buses, they will get used once people know how to use the racks. That's why Vancovuer is so far ahead compared to Toronto where the latter just got their first set of racks only in past few years. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvBJGBxvuW0

I'm not saying people don't use them, it's not applicable to many people other than those who work downtown. And even within downtown, unless your office is along one of those bike lanes, you still struggle with safe commuting.

Maybe useful to know that in the neighbourhoods of Kitslano which borders downtown there is already 10% of folks commuting by bike. In that area there are some on road bike lanes and Shaugnessy, etc. Anyway many of the roads aren't as heavy with traffic. I rode those areas nearly daily when I was unemployed, so I can say safely what it was like at different times of the working day/week/weekend. They are beautiful areas to ride through at any time...except for the crowded times of parents dropping off kids at school.

30 km. long Central Valley Greenway, which was heavily funded by TransLink and some border municipalities of Burnaby and New Westminister, take folks to and from downtown to those outlying areas quite safely ..and they can use the separated bike lane on Dunsmuir St. (or go down Ontario St. etc.). Lots of options that are safer outside of downtown area.

The $$ was from City of Vancouver budget, not intended for the border municipalities . Hence whatever infrastructure was to be within City of Vancouver boundaries. It's taxpayers' money.

Other suburban municipalities, have to pony up money, which they slowly are in their own way each year for past 5 years for infrastructure in their own jurisdictions. In my humble opinion, it's very much those outlying municipalities we need to continously link up Vancouver's cycling infrastructure to theirs..but theirs is "thinner" and not as well-developed.

City of Surrey struggles immensely since it has awful roads in terms of higher speed, wider roads (which contributes to speeding), is more spread out, and lack of many regular cyclists. I've cycled through that area only a few times with last time on our own self-guided touring ride from Washington after we crossed the U.S. border to return home. It's never an uplifting experience cycling-wise through Surrey, but then I haven't explored routes enough yet.

By the way, the hotel that protested publicly huge and loud against the Hornby bike lane...one of their managers is an avid bike commuter and radonneur. He parks his bike in the hotel parking area somewhere. He went on the Grand Fondo ride from Vancouver to Whistler last fall which received enormous publicity. I mean talk about hypocrisy..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shootingstar

By the way, the hotel that protested publicly huge and loud against the Hornby bike lane...one of their managers is an avid bike commuter and radonneur. He parks his bike in the hotel parking area somewhere. He went on the Grand Fondo ride from Vancouver to Whistler last fall which received enormous publicity. I mean talk about hypocrisy..

---

Do you know specifically what the hotel's objections were?

I hear of this over and over with regard to bike lanes --"I'm a cyclist, but..." Regarding one of the controversial bike lanes I referenced in my earlier post, I was shocked to discover my city councilmember was against it. But the more I learned about it, the more I could understand the objections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PamNY

Do you know specifically what the hotel's objections were?

I hear of this over and over with regard to bike lanes --"I'm a cyclist, but..." Regarding one of the controversial bike lanes I referenced in my earlier post, I was shocked to discover my city councilmember was against it. But the more I learned about it, the more I could understand the objections.

---

I'm one of those who said "I'm a cyclist, but..." when people asked me what I thought of this project. I told them it's stupid to be speding so much money on a project that only limited people will benefit when public programs are being cut. The mayor's out of touch with reality, and this project was very political.

I wouldn't say the hotel manager is a hypocrite. Just because he rides a bicycle doesn't mean he'll be supporting an ill-conceived concept. The bike lane affects his business. Most people who go to hotels are from out of town and are either driving themselves or are being driven to by a taxi. By making them go through a maze to access them isn't good for business. I doubt he's saying he's against encouraging others to cycle.

This is just an argument about a very specific, and localized issue. I do think most people support having better infrastructure.

badger, that sounds like the one I menetioned in a beach/tourist down. Very ill concieved. What makes that one so bad is that you have tons of out of towners all summer who will be both driving and riding rented bikes and do not know the area at all. Which is why many people wanted the bike lane between the parking spots and the sidewalk. Not between the road and the parking spots.

Badger,what would you suggest instead spending the money for City of Vancouver for cycling infrastructure? I'm not sure what the non-cycling, roads intrastructure budget....unless one runs over the website on the city budget. Shouldn't be hard ...since you work for the city (fire dept. counts as part of the whole city budget).

Separated bike lanes is the next step up. It doesn't make sense to spend alot of $$$ for this as the lst stage, to put it on a residential street in a residential neighbourhood. Put it where the car traffic is genuinely heavy. But even that, Vancouver's car traffic volume is quite pale..compared to Toronto where I biked into downtown core for several years with over 1 million people pouring into the same area for work.

Would you suggest bike lane, separated lanes (emphasis) in East Vancouver somewhere closer to Hastings St.? Would alot more people want to ride in that area? (I have to say, I did part of it..where the homeless some drug addicts hang out... daily on a commute for a few years going home. )

The reality is that:

the local cycling advocacy group with the City of vancouver engineering staff went over several proposed other streets in the downtown core. Helmucken St. was one of them and the list goes on. Except it gets steep and narrow. Not wide enough. I've ridden it many times since it's close to home (now my 2nd home).

It just sounds to me, the big unspoken message is put bike lanes anywhere except any downtown core in any city where there businesses and that'll keep everyone happy. Is that the route?

And we will never be able to pedestrianize our core downtown streets like some of the bigger European cities with good transit, etc.

What did the Winter OLympics teach us: A ton of people adjusted. Over 1 million people were not using cars in the downtown core...every day. City had an aggressive plan during the Olympics and cut down 30% daily car traffic coming into thecity. So yes, Vancouver proved..to itself, to its own citizens it COULD do it.

It proved to the world. That's why City of Vancouver did think seriously about separated bike lanes. Various public transportation planners and urban planners in north America are intrigued what actually happened during that time in our city.

Sorry. I gotta skype to dearie in Vancovuer. I'm in Calgary....the city of god....I don't want get into this. It's nightmarish biking around here. They barely have painted bike lanes on their 4 lane one way streets downtown. Think of Richards St. and multiply that by 20 streets. It's kind of sick and sad.

I don't think you understand me. I'm not saying DON'T put separated bike lanes, I'm saying how they did it was reckless in spending public funds.

In an ideal world there will be separated bike lanes everywhere, but that's not possible. What I object to is the fact that the ones they created are very limited, in both access and usefulness. If you're traveling from East Vancouver on Adanac bike route and using the Georgia viaduct to go to Pacific Centre, you've hit the jackpot. But if you're traveling from South East Vancouver on several different bike paths wanting to go to Burrard and Thurlow, you are protected only part of the way. You're still wearing a bulls-eye for motorists to hit you after the separated bike lane suddenly stops at Hornby (what's up with that, anyways? they couldn't go one more block to Burrard??). And how do you get back onto the bike lane if you're traveling back? You have to go the wrong way on the lined bike lane to get back onto the separated one.

They spent around $25 MILLION to put in incomplete bike lanes. Wouldn't it have been better to use the money to expand more bike routes? How about completing some existing bike routes that SUDDENLY end without any warning? (Pacific has at least 3 sections where they stop and you're left very vulnerable, especially under Granville bridge headed towards Burrard) Perhaps subsidize or give incentives for the citizens to buy bikes?

I'm not saying boo to bike lanes. I'm not saying make the downtown core closed to cars or keep bikes out. My argument rests solely in Gregor's ridiculous agenda to have Vancouver become the world's most "sustainable" city by spending way too much of the public funds for something that is so impractical.

In fact, a better way to have used that money was to make every street downtown bike friendly. I can usually get somewhere downtown, but have a hard time finding a safe route home.

Badger this is a highlighted slideshow from City of VAncouver, Sept. 2010. It highlights the total usage statistics of cycling, transit, walking before and during Olympics.
http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transpor...nicalBrief.pdf
On slide 34:

the annual 2010 transportation budget was $125 million. This includes typical road paving and other stuff that has nothing to do with bike lanes.
% spent on separated bike lanes for City of Vancouver was: $3 million dollars for 2010. (Not $25 million as you mentioned earlier.)

****Please get back to the people who told you the wrong figure. This misinformation undercuts the long hard work of cycling volunteers who have worked in countless meetings and tireless work educating people....

I spoke with dearie about this just now. He confirmed that the $3 million also included installation of some additional pedestrian/cycling activated controls at some intersections or extra lights.

I trust him because he tried his best to represent for us (cyclists in Vancouver) and has detailed technical discussions with engineering staff at the City of Vancouver.

Until Mar. 2011, he was one the directors for the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition for last 8 yrs.

Still on the city's Bicycle Advisory Committee as a volunteer cycling citizen under the umbrella of City of VAncovuer for past 5 yrs.....I think. I'm losing track of time here..


We really do lead a cycling-dominated life ..on several different fronts. :o
He is not interested in joining Critical mass rides because he knows it just alienates drivers from cyclists. This is what and where he stands.

Hey, if I get maidiebike doll in Vancouver when I visit, would you be interested in picking her up as the next person after me?

I am always amazed a people's ability to whine when they are reminded of the fact that the entire world doesn't revolve around them. Oy vey!

(this in response to the original post, not to any conversation since)

When a person can't connect the dots, one statement made to next, in a logical and reasonable argument, you can not reason with them.

Ask how does supporting alternative transportation begets poverty. How can he justify such connection. People today just can't show the connection even at stretch let alone reasonable.

I for one, can't even begin to see a connection that supporting mass transit leads to poverty.

Stupid! don't waste your time on bin-atama (jar head) no reference to USMC intended though it is often used derisively toward members of USMC.

would like to say to badger and folks: please forgive me for my ranting.

Pam the hotel that objected to bike lane: it was because it ran in front of the hotel,..... but on the other side of the street. I haven't quite figured out the problem there.

By the way, unlike other Canadian cities, some of Vancouver's streets both and downtown, have back laneways, for tenant parking or unloading delivery trucks. (Not for hotels though)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shootingstar

Got into an argument with another person in a different internet forum.

---

Does he have a sense of humour? ;)

Just listened to a short interview with this guy:

http://www.governing.com/poy/mick-cornett.html

The mayor's crusade against obesity became the cornerstone of a whole new vision for the city's future. "We had an automobile-centric culture, a drive-through restaurant mentality," he says. "We hadn't built a pedestrian-friendly community." ....

"It's all part of this culture shift where we're creating a healthier community. This is a renaissance time for Oklahoma City. We're in a golden age."

Oklahoma City sounds like they're doing it right :)