Thank you for your email regarding the bike lanes on Jarvis Street. I appreciate hearing from you.

Toronto’s economy loses billions of dollars every year from gridlock and traffic congestion. We need to make the situation better – not worse. The Jarvis Street bike lanes experiment has been a failure. Ninety-four percent of commuters now face longer commutes on Jarvis Street. Over 15,000 commuters each day are suffering from longer travel times, for the sake of 600 additional cyclists.

The City should remove the bike lanes as soon as possible and improve travel times for thousands of daily commuters. City staff have been directed to develop a low-cost plan to do so. Bike lanes were never intended to be installed on Jarvis Street. The original Environmental Assessment recommended against installing bike lanes – but City Council amended the report to approve bike lanes anyway.

As promised during the mayoral election, I am dedicated to delivering customer service excellence, creating a transparent and accountable government, reducing the size and cost of government and building a transportation city.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts. Please feel free to contact my office again at any time.

Yours truly,

Mayor Rob Ford
City of Toronto

Just in time for ye ole road toll debate to rage up again!

Share / save this post

Bicycling in Toronto has been contentious issue for some time. It really came to head just a little under a year ago when Michael Bryant, then the Attorney General for Ontario, had his run-in Darcy Allan Sheppard, then a general asshole. And bike courier.

The story, if you’re not familiar with it, goes like this: Bryant was driving home in his convertible with his wife beside him after an evening out when Sheppard, drunk and belligerent — for quite a few intersections and toward more than a few other drivers, a pattern of behaviour he regularly engaged in — decided that he’d had enough of cars. Or something. It’s unlikely that what he did had any real reason behind it.

It began, more or less, with Sheppard pulling in front of Bryant’s convertible and falling off his bike (not being knocked off, as was repeatedly suggested) . Maybe he was smashed off his gourd, maybe just trying to pick a fight, maybe both. Witnesses report that at this point Sheppard was screaming obscenities and basically acting like a raving lunatic, something he’d been visibly doing all the way down the street prior to reaching Bryant’s car. You can almost smell the halo above Sheppard’s head, can’t you?

This whole interaction can be seen on somewhat grainy closed-circuit footage, with detractors pointing out how Bryant “rolls toward Sheppard almost immediately”, ignoring the fact that Sheppard darts in front of the car well before it moves, in under a second, and is heavily drunk (according to later toxicology tests), and ready to fight the moment he gets up. Basically, the cycling world’s version of a saint.

Have a look for yourself:

For a moment the convertible lurches forward, something Bryant blames on the sudden alarming nature of the situation, and something that Sheppard supporters just can’t seem to come to grips with. Why would someone be alarmed and temporarily lose control of their vehicle with a bellowing maniac by their side? Why didn’t Bryant sit there and take it or get out of the car and confront Sheppard? With your wife by your side, after all, these are the “sensible” solutions.

Remember, the next time a cyclists cuts you off, get out of your vehicle or step off the curb and beat the living snot out of them – it’s what they would want you to do, it’s the wisest choice.

Supporters maintain that Sheppard was then “pushed” under the car, along with his bike, for almost a block. After which he miraculously jumped up and gave chase to the convertible on his bike, which, despite being dragged under a car for a block, was miraculously unharmed. Miracle upon miracle performed by Saint Sheppard.

In any event, poor innocent Sheppard managed to catch up to Bryant and lunged at him, managing only to grab the side rear-view mirror. At this point, Bryant decided he’d had enough and he floored it, shouting at Sheppard to let go. The cyclist, in a fit of benevolence, vocally refused to let go and the car travelled roughly two blocks with Bryant swerving onto the sidewalk trying to scrape Sheppard off the side of his car. Sheppard eventually let go only after hitting a tree and, in the process, cracking his skull and dying.

Not a good night out.

In the end the charges against Bryant were entirely dropped. Between the videotape evidence and the eyewitness accounts, there just wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with anything. Even after the intense media scrutiny he received (especially as Attorney General), lawyers on both sides agreed that Bryant had done the best he could, given the circumstances. Sheppard supporters said he got off easy because of his high profile. After all, the prosecution wanted nothing more than to just toss their hands in the air and walk away, as prosecution are wont to do. Even Sheppard’s dad said that this was the correct outcome and that he didn’t blame Bryant.

Poor Saint Sheppard, murdered by Bryant in cold blood. “No justice, no peace!”, wept Sheppard’s “family” of fellow couriers, all upstanding citizens in the own right, as they downed bottle after bottle of beer and liquor on the same street corner on which Sheppard died. Then they cycled off, back into the “meat grinder” of the city, angrier than ever, ready to confront all the four-wheeled murderers out there.

The reason I bring this up is to demonstrate the type of mentality (or lack of), that some cyclists carry around. Not all, mind you, but some – usually the most vocal and abrasive ones. And it’s clearly an adversarial attitude, to put it mildly. The cyclist I refer to in the first paragraph would probably fall into this category.

Obviously this guy is a regular two-wheeled warrior, ready to take on the next car that gets in his way. To his credit, he was wearing a helmet and safety gear. He wasn’t actually allowed to be cycling down the middle lane on Jarvis Street, at least not yet. The project to turn a part of the street to bike-only is in the works, but it won’t be the centre lane, and it isn’t ready yet anyways. That didn’t stop this fellow from cursing cars that “cut him off”, and it didn’t stop him from blocking traffic for some time to describe how cars “always” push him off the road (and how they insist on taking up the whole lane).

He was more than happy to stand in the middle of the road, in a section that would otherwise be the left-turn portion, while chatting with me and inviting other cyclists to ride down the “glorious” middle lane – actually insisting that they break the law for their own safety. To be fair, I shouldn’t have been in the lane either, but then again I wasn’t inviting fellow pedestrians to join me in the middle of a busy street based on my own faulty understanding of the law. Plus, I got the hell out of there as soon as this guy finished describing what assholes motorists were while he went on to have more interactions with them just a bit further on.

If you look closely in the photos you’ll notice that there’s a singular traffic light posted above the middle lane. This is used to determine traffic flow; you can drive it one way in the mornings, the other in the afternoons. Today it was closed in both directions as part of the new lane construction. Not opened in either direction.

But since bicycles are exempt from the law, it’s obvious how anyone could make the mistake. Even simple logical deduction can be ignored; you know, like why they would put bicycles in the middle lane instead of the much-more-sensible side lanes — which is where the actual lanes will be. Yes, why expend one bit of energy on rational thought or an attempt to show any consideration for anyone else – fellow cyclists, pedestrians, and especially motorists — when you’re on a bicycle?

Yes, that is sarcasm, and it exemplifies the type of thinking that some cyclists adopt. But even this is too much for some people, like the cyclist I later saw going in the opposite direction, also using the centre lane illegally, assuming he also had the right of way around cars turning left and, while he was at it, also going through a red and nearly colliding with cars (screaming at them, of course). And why even bother wearing a helmet at that point, right? I know it sounds cruel but I wish that a car had hit this guy, just to take the asshole off the road. A menace, not only to himself, but to cars who have to swerve to avoid him, and also to pedestrians. Many cyclists still maintain that hitting someone on a bike can’t cause serious injury or even death. Nothing human-powered could possibly be dangerous.

Basically the attitude is: cyclists own the roads, they have the right of way regardless (because they’re “more vulnerable” – my favourite argument), laws are only for motorized vehicles, and any evidence that bikes are dangerous should be ignored. I’ve tried to challenge a few cyclists with this – news reports of people being hit by bikes and then dying from their injuries – but it’s hard to argue facts when the response is “fuck you, you Fascist pig!” And that’s one of the more rational conversations I’ve had.

It’s kind of like arguing with the G20 “protesters” who maintain that they should be allowed to sit in the middle of a city street because it’s “their right” to “express” themselves. Fuck everyone else’s rights, especially the police because they’re “not human” (no kidding, this is actually what they said). “Wah wah wah! My daddy never loved me! Authorities are fascists! Wah wah wah!”  Exactly the same thing children do in stores when their parents refuse to buy them the toys they want – stomp their feet, then sit down in the middle of the aisle, pout, and scream about how unfair life is. At a certain point, the best thing parents can do is to introduce the kids to the back of their hand.

No small surprise, then, that I saw my fair share of cyclists facing off against G20 riot police. “No justice, no peace!”, they cried as they rallied with groups against Israeli apartheid. It’s the same infantile “me me me” attitude, it just happens to be on two wheels. And what it needs is a good strong smack upside the head. For starters. You want something to really cry about, you whiny little shits? How about some tear gas?

But I’m getting off topic here.

What makes the situation especially taxing is that Jarvis happens to be one of the major north-south thoroughfares in the city – one of the major reasons for the middle lane bi-directionality. It’s a pretty busy street on most days but now, in order to accommodate the children, that lane will be lost. Presumably it’ll be erased and half-width bike lanes added to each side of the street.

As an occasional cyclists I’m not at all convinced it’s necessary. As someone who lives a block away and sees the kind of bicycle traffic that goes through there every day, I’m even less convinced. But the widdle babies have whined their way up to a “green” City Hall and, despite all evidence to the contrary, have managed to convince them of the need for new bike lanes.

Plus, someone got it in their head that cyclists actually obey the rules of the road – that they’ll stick to the new bike lanes, that they’ll stop on reds, that they won’t cut across four lanes of traffic just because they can and, heaven forbid, should they get hit while egregiously breaking the law, that they won’t then attack the driver who is “always” in the wrong.

Is it too late to bring the stocks back into circulation? You know, stick the dipshits into the public square for a sweet shower of rotten veggies and fruits any time they break the law in a dangerous manner. Everyone can get involved, and if the crime was particularly selfish, perhaps the pits could be left in. Having a “peachy” afternoon could be a very positive thing.

Combine that with some sort of licensing system and we’ve got ourselves a winner. I’m sure the little brats will pout, stomp their feet, and scream for a little while, but you know what they say: spare the rod, spoil the child. The streets are no place for kids to be playing around on anyways.

Share / save this post

Office of Toronto City Councillor McConnell
Attn: Councillor McConnell

Hey, Pam-pam! What’s shakin’, baby? Seems like it’s been ages since we chatted, huh? Come to think of it, I don’t think we ever chatted. We’ve never met, as a matter of fact. But with this new scrutiny about the plane trip you took this summer, I wanted to reach out and let you know you have supporters out there. At least one. Here.

In returning from Florida to put in your vote on this summer’s garbage strike, you helped to break the impasse put in place by the very people now pointing their fingers your way. I’m not sure that $1,100 was the cheapest flight you could’ve found, but compared to the waste and mismanagement proffered by the rest of Toronto Council, this is a pittance. If I contributed to your flight from my own exorbitant taxes, I want you to know that I’m not sore about it. Probably cost me, like, a hundredth of a penny. You’re welcome.

Besides, if you were required return to Toronto to do your job during that special emergency vote, it would have been negligent if you didn’t try to get back quickly. I wouldn’t take any flak from anyone over this if I were you. Show ‘em a letter from your satisfied constituent if they think you’re pulling a fast one on them.

Basically, Pammers, don’t let them get you down. You’re doing your job, and you’re doing it well; the other councillors are just jealous. One day they’ll be in jail for whatever illicit underage sexual relationships they’re engaged in (aren’t they screwing the innocent?), and you and I will laugh about it over a couple of cold ones.

Stalwartly yours,
Patrick

To the cyclists of Toronto,

Okay, I admit it, I feel for you. A bit.

When cops start blocking bike lanes to stop off for lunch, that’s a little much. I think everyone’s in agreement that this is just not right. If it’s a fine for the officer, so be it. If there’s an additional reprimand, I don’t think it would be out of place. After all, if the police are going to be enforcing something, they should be following it, otherwise John Q. Lawman won’t be getting much respect around here.

Your beef with many car drivers is a perfectly valid one and this is a fine example. The problem I’m seeing is that there’s a whole lotta antagonism between both sides and no one is making any progress. I see you screaming at cars, many of whom have just made innocent mistakes, sometimes just to vent, sometimes for very good reason indeed. I see them shaking their fists back, neck veins so strained that a pinprick would just instantly fill the inside of the car with red. Woh-oh-oh-hoaw there! Just hang on a second, therre, Nelly. Is it getting hot out here? Let’s just take a deep breath.

I’ve been on both sides of that glass. There are most certainly jerk-hole drivers, and without a doubt jerk-hole cyclists. Jerk-hole pedestrians too. The conclusion I’ve come to is that I’m not going to depend on anyone out there, especially not the jerk-holes, to prevent my death. Besides, there’s plenty of opportunity for death at the hands of other types of drivers: tired, distracted, drunk, high, having a cardiac arrest, having a stroke, having a mechanical failure, etc.

So, you can point at the motorists all you want, but the onus is on you to take responsibility for your own actions first. It’s tempting to just say fuck it when your life is threatened so often, but I urge you to stick it out. Obey the rules of the road to the best of your ability. At the same time, you should expect no less from your fellow travellers. And now you also have a much stronger moral position from which to cuss people off. You can flip them a most righteous bird.

Or you also try talking to people. If they’re parked in the bike lane, why not give them the benefit of the doubt? Maybe they really don’t know what the lane is for. You’ve got tourists and other out-of-towners driving around and the signage around the city’s already pretty crazy. I drove downtown for years and still managed to do lots of inadvertently illegal stuff; rarely did I try to murder cyclists. The two aren’t related.

If I could leave you with one thing it would be this: imagine the surprised driver who, after dangerously cutting you off, finds himself having a friendly and relaxed conversation with you (instead of the usual scream) who explains why that maneuver back there really wasn’t such a good idea. Now you’re not just another jerk-hole cyclist, you’re a human being who’s just trying to get through the day. Just like the driver. Queue rapport! And … action!

Shift that paradigm, as we used to say in the nineties. Oh, and Pam McConnell’s on your side; let that lofty perspective keep you afloat.

I’m still convinced that the cyclist who died hanging off the side of Michael Bryant’s car was being a jerk, but he was just one individual with a mess of personal problems. If he’s going to be the poster boy for something, let it be the end of an era.

Pedestrianly yours,
Patrick

To the former From the desk of Patrick,

Awww crap. Sorry, pal. I thought I was using a copy, I swear, if I knew I was changing the original, I never would’ve done it!

I didn’t have the heart to try to re-write you. Also, I don’t have an idea what you were about. Something regarding sweaters? *sigh*

You’re up in post heaven now with all the other posts that get deleted by naive blog owners (when will they learn?!)

I hope you had a good life here, brief as it was. Your candle blew out long before your legend ever did. Sir Elton John.

Regretfully,
Patrick

Share / save this post

No great story behind this, unfortunately. No lawsuits, no threatening phone calls, no late-night tech support, just a boneheaded click on the wrong button.

Now the comments below are completely out of context. Neat :)

So, sorry, but have a look at some of the other stuff around here. The archives in the sidebar at the right, I mean. Or do a search for a titillating term.

Share / save this post