Comment 119958

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted September 09, 2016 at 15:21:44 in reply to Comment 119957

Let's look at the facts:

  1. Whitehead has systematically criticized any efforts at street calming, two way conversion and bike lanes in the lower city.

  2. He has repeatedly stated that he believes the primary purpose of these streets is to make it quick and easy for commuters to get to and from the Mountain ("essentially main thoroughfares for residents living on the mountain").

  3. He insists on misrepresenting these particular streets as "main thoroughfares" (by which I assume he means arterials) when they are in fact local collectors. They used to be classified as "minor arterials" before 2011. His comments imply he would indeed like them to revert to their "minor arterial" classification (i.e. "wind these streets back").

  4. There is concrete traffic measurement evidence for speeding, including extremely high speeds, at all times of the day on these streets before the bike lanes were introduced. This evidence comes from the speed trailer last year and the 2002 Durand Traffic Study. Whitehead does not appear concerned by this, and indeed would prefer higher speeds.

It is a fair summary of these positions to say that he wants "wind these streets back to a time when cut-through traffic tore through these urban neighbourhoods at dangerously high speeds at all hours of the day."

p.s. I live on Charlton between James and Queen!

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2016-09-09 15:45:44

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds