Cyclists defend NDG bike path
Cyclists are defending the bike path along Terrebonne in NDG which was initially, let’s recall, voted for by everyone on the borough council, including those now baying for tearing it out as soon as possible.
Update: I liked this tweet: “To the politicians making a spectacle of their opposition to the bike lanes: are you really listening to the people, or are you just sticking it to Plante?”
Jebediah Pallindrome 14:19 on 2020-09-06 Permalink
Absolutely infuriating.
I’m not sure which is worse:
1- The people who take no interest in local affairs and couldn’t be bothered to show up to a meeting, then complain about not being consulted
2- The politicians who’re so completely spineless they’ll actually undermine their own authority by dropping everything to accommodate the people who fit the above description
Mark Côté 17:42 on 2020-09-06 Permalink
It’s been an extremely hot-button topic here in NDG. Snow removal and parking can get people more upset than pretty much anything else. The bike lanes supposedly removed 250 parking spots so the magnitude of the rage is particularly high with this one.
Jebediah Pallindrome 21:09 on 2020-09-06 Permalink
The only way around this (as far as I see it) is for each borough (and the city) to have to mail a printed newsletter to every address each month, listing every decision and concern brought before them, and advertising exactly when the meetings are and how everyone can watch from home. These would have to be written by municipal employees who would be ironically forbidden from any involvement in local politics.
Add mandatory voting for all residents and a locally-recognized electoral ‘holiday’ to guarantee an acceptable level of participation.
There’s so much money at stake, people’s lives and quality of life. Why allow so much to be left up to chance? Cities (esp. Montreal) are too important for ‘n’importe quoi’
Kevin 11:42 on 2020-09-07 Permalink
The sooner the Terrebonne path is gone, the better.
There was no plan for this, and the roadwork done the previous year to alter the street and sidewalks makes Terrebonne a very bad place for a bike path.
Mark Côté 13:21 on 2020-09-07 Permalink
What about the alterations makes it bad for a bike path compared to other streets?
Jebediah Pallindrome 14:04 on 2020-09-07 Permalink
@Kevin –
How sure are we of this?
The city has a planning department. Staffed with professional – licensed – urban planners.
Do you actually think that the city/borough did this without the involvement of professionals?
Second guessing doctors and public health officials, sure – I get that. It’s not like they had to go to university for roughly a decade, pass a bunch of licensing exams and are constantly scrutinized by their peers.
Same thing airline pilots – if I think the airplane can fly upside down my opinion is obviously equal to the person who has spent 5,000 hours in the cockpit. It’s all relative.
Truth is highly biased towards facts.
Tim S. 20:05 on 2020-09-07 Permalink
The bike path was put up in a huge hurry. There was no signage warning anyone that it was coming. I actually watched city workers paint lines around cars that had only been given 24 hours to move. Terrebonne now has a few sidewalk bumpouts that basically cut off the bike path and force cyclists into the path of vehicles. Around the schools the bike path disappears completely so cyclists can enjoy the experience of weaving around school buses (for part of the day, anyways).
As a pedestrian on that street, I really like the bike path, it gives me more cover from cars, visibility at intersections and room for social distancing. As a well-thought out urban mobility project, I can see the flaws.
Kevin 23:24 on 2020-09-07 Permalink
Jebediah
How sure? Dead certain, since the councillors who voted for this emergency plan (On Terrebonne and other streets) when it was proposed in June said it was an experiment.
And if you think politicians always listen to the professionals when it comes to planning, well, our streets and water mains and sewers would be in much better shape.