TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- More traffic hell coming for Toronto: University/Spadina Bike lanes and BIKE BOXES?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* Sure was from what I saw, and my dutch landlords told me.

Maybe you spent too much time in the cafes. There were plenty of cars near central station.

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* Sure was from what I saw, and my dutch landlords told me.

quote:

News Amsterdam: More Trips by Bike than by Car AMSTERDAM, The Netherlands - The bicycle is the means of transport used most often in Amsterdam. Between 2005 and 2007 people in the city used their bikes on average 0.87 times a day, compared to 0.84 for their cars. This is the first time that bicycle use exceeds car use. In 2006 the inhabitants of Amsterdam engaged in some 2 million trips a day, an 8% reduction compared to 1990. This is due to the number of trips per person per day falling from 3.6 to 3.1%. The number of transfers has fallen in the old city within the ring road in particular. The number of trips by car, compared to 1990, has fallen in all districts (-14%), whereas the number of trips by bicycle has only risen within the ring road (+36%). The bike is used most often in the town centre (41% versus an average of 28%) and the car least often (10% versus an average of 28%). This can be attributed to the restrictive parking policies enacted here since the 1990s. �Dienst Infrastructuur en Beheer�, the infrastructure department of the city registered approximately 235,000 car movements in both directions at the city centre in 1990; by 2006 this had fallen to 172,000, a decrease of over a quarter. Over the same period the number of daily movements by bicycle rose from 86,000 to over 140,000 (+60%). Published @ 23-06-2009

SOURCE

quote:

Originally posted by miketg23 Maybe you spent too much time in the cafes. There were plenty of cars near central station.

I actually didn't frequent the cafes

If you read what Jay asked, he didn't say name a city that has NO cars. He said name one that has fewer cars than bikes.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Also when they do bike lanes they dont sacrifice capacity for them. And they also use parks and allyways as much as they can as bike only networks.

Definitely true. Amsterdam's (and Europe in general) transit system (public transit, bike routes, and roads) are light years ahead of Canada.

I've have zero experience in urban planning, but I just feel like things are so screwed up already here that it'd be almost impossible to switch to a better system without starting completely from scratch (which obviously is not very feasible)

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* I actually didn't frequent the cafes If you read what Jay asked, he didn't say name a city that has NO cars. He said name one that has fewer cars than bikes.

read it again.
He said "does not have cars (and lots of them) downtown."

quote:

Originally posted by miketg23 read it again. He said "does not have cars (and lots of them) downtown."

whoops! my bad then!

Makes more sense why Malek disagreed.

But I still say that Amsterdam has fewer cars downtown than bikes.

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* whoops! my bad then! Makes more sense why Malek disagreed. But I still say that Amsterdam has fewer cars downtown than bikes.

I would agree with that and judging by the number of narrow roads, channels, bikers and intoxicated pedestrians, I doubt I would want to drive there.

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* I actually didn't frequent the cafes If you read what Jay asked, he didn't say name a city that has NO cars. He said name one that has fewer cars than bikes.

No i asked NO cars, or fewer cars.. not fewer than bikes


Anyways amsterdam is a great model. Compact city. Easy to walk because of that. Great transit system. Almost no need for a car in the entire country.

But that only comes from smart urban planning. We cannot adopt this model because everything north of bloor is low density.

Been to Asmterdam too, Amsterdam is an old built up city, built before the car. So obviously there's not much space for cars to begin with, and I don't think they plan on demolishing houses to widen streets for cars, their system is working for them. The City was built and designed without the car in mind, so everything is mighty compact, and with a very mild weather, biking and walking are a real pleasure.

SO their context is very different, yes there's less cars, but there's still alot of them even with an amazing transit system.

Now over here, with our quality of living standards being different, anything under 1000sqf living space is a squeeze. So we built bigger houses, bigger lots (well it used too) and sreets can't be narrow because of our massive snowstorms that turn three lane streets into one lane, barely... plus having bigger, more laid out cities make transit much more expensive, and biking, walking much less interesting.

my 3 cents

quote:

Originally posted by malek Been to Asmterdam too, Amsterdam is an old built up city, built before the car. So obviously there's not much space for cars to begin with, and I don't think they plan on demolishing houses to widen streets for cars, their system is working for them. The City was built and designed without the car in mind, so everything is mighty compact, and with a very mild weather, biking and walking are a real pleasure. SO their context is very different, yes there's less cars, but there's still alot of them even with an amazing transit system. Now over here, with our quality of living standards being different, anything under 1000sqf living space is a squeeze. So we built bigger houses, bigger lots (well it used too) and sreets can't be narrow because of our massive snowstorms that turn three lane streets into one lane, barely... plus having bigger, more laid out cities make transit much more expensive, and biking, walking much less interesting. my 3 cents

thats about the jist of it.


i wish the car hating hippies would catch on LOL

quote:

Originally posted by malek my 3 cents

To translate for TOTAs;

1 cent for GST

1 cent for PST

1 cent for lui ostie

Amsterdam also has a population of 740k. Toronto has a population of 2.5 million, and that's just the core; factor in the GTA and it's over 5 million.

So there's a slight difference in planning required. The 5 million people who need to be in Toronto for whatever reason cannot all live downtown. Winter and long distances make bikes impractical for anybody living outside the downtown hot spot, and the comical obsolescence of our transit system necessitates driving.

Toronto is not New York. Toronto is not Amsterdam. The city does not have the infrastructure to support the regular influx of people without them supplying their own transportation. Sacrificing *any* of the city's road space for the tiny minority of cyclists who can already get where they need using the transit infrastructure we do have can only serve to hurt the city - politically, economically, and environmentally.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Any plan to reduce capacity gets a FAIL in my books.

you're FAIL

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Lets do one way streets if we really badly and truly want to copy everything new york does. One way streets increase capacity AND allow room for a bike lane. And you only need one bike lane! Also there are fewer chances for left turn accidents. Pretty well any city worth living in has a grid of one way streets because its the next logical step to becoming a large city. And a step that our provincial way of thinking has largely ignored (along with getting rid of street cars which most cities did in the 50s and 60s)

While I agree a grid of one way streets would be great (I think it works really well in NYC), the actual implimentation of such a grid would be a gong show. Lots of money, and lots of frustration. These matters require pragmatism, not idealism.

quote:

Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers While I agree a grid of one way streets would be great (I think it works really well in NYC), the actual implimentation of such a grid would be a gong show. Lots of money, and lots of frustration. These matters require pragmatism, not idealism.

Please tell me that you don't consider bike boxes to be more pragmatic than one-way streets. Pragmatism would be telling cyclists to take the bus. Don't get me wrong, it's not the right thing to do, and it would be political suicide, but it's definitely the pragmatic solution to the car-bicycle turf war.

quote:

Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers While I agree a grid of one way streets would be great (I think it works really well in NYC), the actual implimentation of such a grid would be a gong show. Lots of money, and lots of frustration. These matters require pragmatism, not idealism.

if this city can waste millions on speed bumps, chicanes etc, surely we can convert some roads to one way.

i agree we need pragmatism, not idealism. And pragmatism calls for a balanced solution, not an anti car solution (especially in a northern climate)

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.