Tewder
Senior Member
Hmm. Your response is more diplomatic than mine. I'm happy to be more blunt, and to show a little outrage: there is not a chance in hell that any part of the Richmond bike lane will be removed in favour of a Saks valet parking lane—nor should there be—as 1) the cycling lobby (rightfully) has way more clout currently than some may realize, and 2) the need to keep cyclists safe far exceeds the need to cater to the entitlements of the tin-eared.
For those who don't know, the Richmond and Adelaide bike lanes have been a major boon, opening up the downtown to another mode of transportation, a sustainable one, and have helped increase cycle traffic significantly in the area because of the speed and (especially) the safety they offer to cyclists.
It was a battle to get the lanes as many feared that motorized vehicle traffic would be adversely affected, while others didn't even believe that people would want/need to cycle into or through the area, but now that the lanes are in and the cycle traffic has grown (and motorized vehicle traffic is fine), you simply don't carve up the lane: it's a major safety issue. Private cars will always be with us—and in fact the future is brighter in terms of safety as driverless vehicles as on their way—but until such time that cars don't have a possibility of running a cyclist down, you don't add a several kilometre-long protected lane and then interrupt it for an entirely frivolous use.
There are certain prices that are not worth paying for the cachet of having a Saks here. If this store fails because of no valet service at the door? Tough shit for Saks.
42
There really is no need to turn this into class warfare. Rich people ride bikes too