|
|
|
Moving beyond "downtown vs. suburbs"
- Thread starter King of Kensington
- Start date
Memph
Active Member
I think in the streetcar and early automobile era, suburbs were often bedroom communities, they might have had some local retail but often little office or industry. That changed as industry got pushed out from the city core, and office jobs followed residents out into the suburbs as automobiles made non-central job locations more accessible (transit was often very downtown centric).
It's true that there was a time when unincorporated communities existed as "suburbs" in Canada, but for most of the post-war era, these communities outside the core city have had mayors and their own government. And since 1960 or so, they've had significant industry and office jobs.
It's true that there was a time when unincorporated communities existed as "suburbs" in Canada, but for most of the post-war era, these communities outside the core city have had mayors and their own government. And since 1960 or so, they've had significant industry and office jobs.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Industry moved out to the outskirts for the low value of the land and to avoid any complaints that they may create. That is why the stockyards originally settled around in the sticks and emptiness of Keele & St. Clair. Over the years, employees settled around that industry to be close to work. Again, over the years, non-employees settled around that industry, and (of course) started complaining about the smells and problems that the industry produced. Now, decades later, that industry just moved further out, or worse, overseas.
BuyNSell
New Member
hard to stop that though
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Why don't the suburban arterial roads (generally) have bicycle lanes?
The traffic lanes in the suburbs are wider than in the inner city. They were originally made wider than downtown because of the higher speed limits. Yet, we're seeing the speed limits going down from 60 km/h to 50 km/h. If the speed limit is now 50 km/h on a wide suburban arterial road, then there is space on the asphalt itself to put in bicycle lanes. If the speed limit is 60 km/h, put in separated bicycle lanes using part of the grass boulevard.
Then there is the problem of the roads department not clearing the bicycle lanes and paths of snow in winter...
Bicycles are transportation.
The traffic lanes in the suburbs are wider than in the inner city. They were originally made wider than downtown because of the higher speed limits. Yet, we're seeing the speed limits going down from 60 km/h to 50 km/h. If the speed limit is now 50 km/h on a wide suburban arterial road, then there is space on the asphalt itself to put in bicycle lanes. If the speed limit is 60 km/h, put in separated bicycle lanes using part of the grass boulevard.
Then there is the problem of the roads department not clearing the bicycle lanes and paths of snow in winter...
Bicycles are transportation.
spider
Senior Member
Because they don't have many bicycles, those that they have are all on the sidewalk.
No one will care, see above.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Not true anymore - even out in places like Mississauga. There is a surprisingly high number of cyclists on arterial roads and not on sidewalks.
AoD
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Because the riders are too scared to ride their bicycles sharing the road with speeding automobiles. 60 km/h is too fast for some. Even 50 km/h is too fast for young ones. However, any bike with a wheel diameter of under 24 inches (61 cm) can ride on a sidewalk.
allyoucaneatpizza
New Member
This isn't true. I live in Central Etobicoke and there are bike lanes on Royal York, Rathburn, Martin Grove and Eglinton which are all major roads.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Not Martin Grove north of Eglinton. Not Islington (except for a tiny section for a couple of blocks north of Rathburn).
Birchmount and Pharmacy used to have bike lanes. Gone, just like Jarvis.
Eglinton has a bike path on the south side in Etobicoke, but it's not cleared of snow in winter.
There is room on the major arterial roads in the suburbs, but most of the bike lanes are being put on minor roads. Or river valleys for recreation purposes, not for transporation purposes.
spider
Senior Member
Wonder why?
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The outer areas of the 416 consider bicycles to be recreational, not transportation. Putting bicycle lanes out of sight in the river valleys, does that. Otherwise, the arterial roads would eventually have to reduce the speed limits on them to 50 km/h, or (horrors!) 40 km/h.
spider
Senior Member
In the outer 416 (you really must visit one day) bicycles ARE recreational vehicles. One could set up a traffic cam on any arterial road out here and would be more likely to see a flying saucer than a cyclist especially in inclement weather.
Inclement weather is the factor that defines cyclists as recreational or otherwise. See November, December, January and February for examples.
Memph
Active Member
Not necessarily. I use my bike for going to university and shopping trips from April to November (and especially May to October), and then take the bus or walk in the winter. So I'm not biking in the middle of winter, but that doesn't mean I don't use my bike for transportation.
ehlow
Senior Member
Are we discussing why the roads weren't built with bike lanes in the first place, or why they aren't added now?
If the latter, I would assume it's because you'd have to take away some space from cars, narrowing lanes, removing turn lanes. This is politically difficult especially in the suburbs where the majority drive on the roads and never bike on main roads. We've seen this with the "war on the car" slogan and the Scarborough bike lanes being reverted. The other choice is spending money widening the roads onto the grass that acts as a buffer between the sidewalk and the road. I'm guessing the issue is cost & priority in that case.
I've seen new & very suburban roads have bike lanes on them in Kitchener-Waterloo:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4342...!1e1!3m2!1sMlLgrXBbB136LKV3bDlF0Q!2e0!5m1!1e3
They are usually very rarely used except for the occasional road/recreational cyclist, however, there's no real reason not to have bike lanes if constructing a road these days.
That's another thing, even with a bike lane it's often uncomfortable to bike with cars zooming 80km/h past you. I'd rather bike on on a street with no bike lanes downtown than a street with bike lanes in the outer suburbs.
If we're looking at why they didn't have the originally, I'd guess we'd need to look at the historical context. We could also ask: why didn't they build bus lanes on the highways built in the 50's & 60's? Why didn't they build roads wide with reserved center lanes for buses or future transit lines?
If the latter, I would assume it's because you'd have to take away some space from cars, narrowing lanes, removing turn lanes. This is politically difficult especially in the suburbs where the majority drive on the roads and never bike on main roads. We've seen this with the "war on the car" slogan and the Scarborough bike lanes being reverted. The other choice is spending money widening the roads onto the grass that acts as a buffer between the sidewalk and the road. I'm guessing the issue is cost & priority in that case.
I've seen new & very suburban roads have bike lanes on them in Kitchener-Waterloo:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4342...!1e1!3m2!1sMlLgrXBbB136LKV3bDlF0Q!2e0!5m1!1e3
They are usually very rarely used except for the occasional road/recreational cyclist, however, there's no real reason not to have bike lanes if constructing a road these days.
That's another thing, even with a bike lane it's often uncomfortable to bike with cars zooming 80km/h past you. I'd rather bike on on a street with no bike lanes downtown than a street with bike lanes in the outer suburbs.
If we're looking at why they didn't have the originally, I'd guess we'd need to look at the historical context. We could also ask: why didn't they build bus lanes on the highways built in the 50's & 60's? Why didn't they build roads wide with reserved center lanes for buses or future transit lines?
Last edited: