Comment 94358

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted November 06, 2013 at 13:20:44 in reply to Comment 94354

"in gross numbers, the roadway infrastructure costs are fairly paid for by drivers who use the road."

That is absolutely NOT the bottom line. The bottom line is #1 it's virtually impossible to calculate all externalities, and #2, if we ignore the externalities and simplify it to direct cost/revenue, driver's don't cover their fair share unless they live in the GTA (where we have the highest driver:lane-km ratio)

As far as local projects, these are not experiments. We may call some of these changes "pilot programs" but they are not by any means experimental.

Other cities worldwide have already carried out the experiments that prove close ties between viability of a city and its livability - meaning walkability, bikeability, density, transit service, etc.

The city's own analysis has determined we need to stop catering to high speed traffic and start enhancing pedestrian, cycling and transit. It's in our official planning documents and has been for years.

The data is in and experts have been visiting us to tell us what to do for many years.

We do not listen, because staff and council are terrified of making these necessary changes for fear of reactions exactly like the one you posted on this article.

You seem to understand that things need to change. No one here is shy about supporting the greater change that's necessary. Fighting the change because of personal commute times is selfish, and reactions like yours are holding council back from pushing this city forward.

I vote down for offensiveness and up for humour. I cast no votes based on my level of agreement.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds