7mo ago

Judge denies injunction to stop Toronto bike lane removal

www.nationalobserver.com

10 comments

That headline belongs in the "Double Negatives" Hall of Fame.
- Should read something like "Judge allows removal of Toronto bike lanes by denying injunction"
Firestone acknowledged that the case raises a serious constitutional issue; however, he ruled that the group failed to prove “irreparable harm”
So a serious constitutional issue that’s going to put lives in danger isn’t doing irreparable harm? Absolutely maddening
Unrelated quote I’m posting to brighten your day
“I am going to make sure we have like-minded judges,” Ford said.
Why are they all so hellbent on fucking up traffic? Have they all forgotten how much cyclists fuck up vehicular traffic? I'm not at all saying this as a negative to people on bikes, but fuck is it frustrating when they don't have dedicated space and end up with a massive traffic jam behind them because the traffic also can't pass safely.
Good call. Those bike lanes are a traffic disaster. They should be on side streets.
- Some of the streets where those bike lanes were installed actually saw reduced travel times for cars. Not to mention that "just put them on side streets" does not really work since destinations are found on the main streets and side streets usually don't run perfectly parallel to main streets.
  
  I used to drive to Toronto every day, usually down University Ave, but sometimes down Bay St. I can tell you for free that traffic got much worse on University as a result of those bike lanes.
  The destinations argument doesn't really work, since you can easily bike on the road for a short distance to get to where you're going, or have a short walk.
- There are countless papers that prove or demonstrate the exact opposite.

10 comments