Tonight Council will consider a review of the remaining "traffic calming measures" in the north east quadrant. Recommendation from General Committee is to "refer the matter back to staff for an analysis of current traffic calming measures and the impact of new buildings under construction in the area and
That the community have an opportunity to provide input with regards to the "diversions."
Councillors have received nineteen e-mails from residents in the area; one in support of removing the "diversions" .All others opposed and horrified by the prospect.
The staff report has already indicated if the "diversions" were to be removed, traffic would increase.
"Diversions" are obstructions. Purpose of which to block the flow of traffic.
Blocking the flow of traffic is exactly opposite to the purpose of public rights of way.
Road patterns are designed to interconnect and provide for the safe, efficient, smooth movement of traffic.
Millions of dollars are spent on engineers to design the system. Water and sewer collection and distribution are incorporated in the roads.
In any development, infrastructure comes first. Llots are created to fit the road system. The design not only contemplates movement of traffic and other utilities, emergencies, garbage collection and snow plowing are planned for efficiency.
Before the traffic calming plan was received by the last Council I requested public works director and fire chief put into writing, the impact on fire protection, snow plowing and garbage collection.
They did.
Even while the City ofToronto were removing chicanes because of neck injuries to fire fighters , the letter from the Fire department gave assurance there would be no impact.
The Public Works Director who denied all responsibility for the traffic calming plan ,stated chicanes would not slow response time. Fire trucks would just drive right over them,he said. .
Which was true and the reason firefighters had neck injuries. And chicanes were in the course of being removed even as we planned to install them
At the time the plan was being considered. an election was imminent. Estimates for the project were
$100,000. Three candidates were in the running for the Mayoralty. Any one of them would have sold the crown jewels for the political advantage that might achieve.
Contrary professional advice would have fallen on deaf ears.
It was not provided anyway.
Any more than it is now.
If roads are to serve the purpose of safe,smooth efficient movement of traffic. "Diversions"or blockades have exactly the opposite effect.
Where is the logic of spending millions of dollars of hard-earned tax dollars from the town's general revenue fund on roads designed by engineers on the public payroll, for the safe, smooth, efficient movement of traffic, while at the same time constructing chicanes, blockades , and speed bumps to achieve the exact opposite and literally remove said traffic from said streets.
Staff have indicated removal of the "diversions" ( closed off streets)would result in traffic increase.
Well , Duh!
It is a tale told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
What happens when residents of other streets in the heart of town demand their streets be closed to through traffic and effect artificial obstructions in order for the clock to be turned back a century when the town had a busy, thriving, growing metropolis with a population of four thousand souls?
How do we say ;
NO . What is there about that word you do not understand
9 comments:
Ah, but councillor Gaertner still claim that their installation of chicanes was a ' noble experiment '. Gotta love that woman. Everything they did was good, honourable, transparent, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Excuse me councillor, but why should the community not have an opportunity to provide input?
You have indicated already why they would not want them to be removed "traffic would increase".
Traffic calming has ZERO impact on water and sewer... why bring that up? The size of the streets are not being changed... why are lot sizes mentioned?
How many times does a CYFS vehicle travel down these streets in a week? How many times create the "neck problem"?
Are these streets there to provide "safe, smooth efficient movement of traffic" or are they there for the local traffic to get to/from the arterial roads meant to carry the traffic that used this area as a fast shortcut?
Where is the logic in spending hard-earned tax dollars to remove things that have already been paid for?
I think the the solution is simple. 1. Leave things as they are. 2. When other residents ask for similar, they answer is "NO, it did not work before, it cost too much and we are not going down that road again." 3. When these "calmed streets" require reconstruction or resurfacing 15-20 years form now, include the removal then.
Draw a line in the sand. Live with what is there and look to change later.
The town can spin it's wheels & waste $ on OMB appeals but ' infilling ' is coming. And the # of residents who bitch & complain about the threat to their ' way of life ' is minimal.
Still, I fully expect our council to dither at the meeting and come up with a wishy-washy do-nothing ' plan '.
I don't expect the town's historic core to be regarded and managed in the same manner as the areas of modern, 'cookie cutter' suburban sprawl.
Thank you 8:57 for your non nonsense practical response. Smart, simple and efficient, and there is no way council could ever come up with this.
Pity.
3:39 PM
It is so impressive when you compliment your earlier comments. Not.
With all due respect, I totally disagree with 8:57 and 3:39.
Council should learn from its mistakes and correct them where possible. Leaving a total mess in place for 20 years make absolutely no sense to me. Fix the problem and don't make the same mistake again. Just like voting for council.
8:08pm
With all due respect, how is it a total mess? It seems to me that the residents still want it. It will cost money to remove it. Why bother?
I am also 8:57 but not 3:39 - thanks for the comment of ignorance Mr./Mrs. 6:49pm
If motorists haven't been able to figure out how to travel through this area by now, Lord help us. Don't throw more good money after bad, it really doesn't affect most of the towns people. When the roads need redoing, get rid of everything then. Ms. Buck, I agree that the original calming was designed to help a 'select few', but I can't see how spending more money at this time will solve anything. Just make things more 'just'.
Post a Comment