Bike Report Says What We Predicted

rick.chiarelli.ad


 

When you pay $3,700 of taxpayer money to a cycling pressure group for research, guess what you get?

A report that says Ottawa needs more and better cycling facilities. Who knew?

Kitchissippi Councillor Jeff Leiper paid the money and he got the expected result. Should he have paid for this? No. Councillors don’t need to pay pressure groups for research. As a rule, lobbyists research can be had for free … incessantly.

More and better cycling was not why the voters of Kitchissippi elected Leiper. No, they were sick to death of a councillor who was who too close to the development community. Katherine Hobbs never saw a development she didn’t like. In fact, Hobbs was quite the biking advocate. With Leiper, cycling looks like his reason for being.

So Kitchissippi voters didn’t get what they wanted … again. Leiper at planning committee had an opportunity to deal with the most significant report on city development in a decade, the high-rise and zoning report. His participation at the meeting was pathetic, like someone who hadn’t read the report and wanted staff to summarize the changes it would make. He didn’t even get that.

The Bulldog offered to publish the lobbyist cycling report but Leiper was nowhere on it.

However, Bulldog reader Nicholas got a copy and sent it to your agent. Thank you, Nicholas.

Nicholas for Kitchissippi councillor. The current guy has stopped representing the interests of the people who elected him and has opted to over-indulge in his personal passion. That’s not the way of good representation.

The report is below:

Cycling Report

 

• To comment on this post, use the reply box at the bottom of this page.

• Start your own debate or comment on another pressing issue, by going to The Bulldog Forum.

• To Get More Than 30 Great Features On The Bulldog From Lifestyle To Technology And Much More, Go To The Full Bulldog Index. Click Here.

 

 

• Return to The Bulldog (Ottawa), The Bulldog ForumBulldog Canadian or Bulldog Politics.

 












8 thoughts on “Bike Report Says What We Predicted

  1. Well, I almost stopped reading after I read “perceived level of danger” and “large minority” but I continued.

    Then I almost stopped again when the “report” took the tactic of pulling at my heart-strings by putting in a picture (pg V) that included everything except the family pet but I continued. When I got to the LTS classifications I fell off my chair and rolled around on the floor laughing but I continued.

    I read the whole thing and I walk away with the conclusion that if you build it it doesn’t mean they will come. Leave the biking in heavy traffic to the LTS4 group and stop practicing pseudo-psychology on the LTS 1,2 & 3’s.

    And, please stop talking about perceived safety. Something is either safe or it isn’t.
    skoal,
    Chaz

    1+

  2. I’m not as brave as Chaz but decided to battle my way through the executive summary.

    Some good points were raised but even the summary became tedious about half-way through. An executive summary is intended to provide three, maybe four paragraphs of high-level information. If the reader is interested in a point or two, they can refer to the table of contents in order to locate further details. The information concerning LTS was agonizing to read and at that point I began to lose interest. Additionally, there is no reference to the length of the cycling season in the city (six months approximately) which has an impact on the point made about more people cycling to work.

    One thing Ottawa has built that works well is the OC Transpo transitway. It is efficient, keeps the roadways travelled by commuters clear of bus traffic, and is out of sight. The summary mentions the redesign of the downtown infrastructure as well as the master transportation plan. I propose building a transitway for bicycles that begins within the rebuilt downtown infrastructure mentioned in the summary and joins the existing OC Transitway at various points. This way bicycle riders will be able to access most of the city and they won’t have to deal with as much traffic.

    OC Transpo drivers will require some training but overall safety of our roadways will increase for everyone.

    1+

    1. Sisco:

      First using the Transitway for bikes is brilliant.

      Second, your agent got out the website Weatherbase and discovered that the days available to reasonable cyclists is less than one-third of the year.

      Remember we have heat-warning days, rain-thunderstorms, ice storms. Do the math.

      It’s a lot fewer days than most people realize.

      cheers

      kgray

      1+

    2. Sisco,

      I ain’t that brave. As I said, “but I continued.”

      It was the rolling around on the floor after reading LTS classifications that gave me the endorphin blast needed to finish the read.

      And, that was not a report nor executive summary. It was a commercial at best.

      skoal,
      Chaz

      0

  3. Thanks, Ken. Lots of just normal people who live in the city have good ideas. I find it very frustrating trying to discuss new concepts with our leaders because they won’t listen.

    0

  4. Gosh. Was that ever long-winded and one-sided.

    “5% of person’s inside the Greenbelt ride their bikes to work”… in what months and what percentage are they of all the taxpayers in this city who will pay for this infrastructure.

    Will they have potholes to contend with?

    Note the study’s concentration in Kitchissippi Councillor Jeff Leiper’s ward … hardly a complete analysis of these needs. Perhaps persons living in the ward should have a special assessment to pay for their bikeways.

    Many of us have seen how much the Churchill Avenue changes are being utilized

    Did the cost come out of the councillor’s own pocket or his office budget.

    1+

      1. That is not the inference that was presented.
        So … we the taxpayers paid for a questionable study … same old, same old.

        0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *