03-07-2024, 12:29 PM
(03-07-2024, 10:53 AM)westwardloo Wrote:(03-06-2024, 06:40 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: FWIW...it is only chance that municipal politics play out this way. For some issues, the region is on the wrong side and the cities are more progressive. This is the case for bike lanes, road safety, and other more local issues. In this case, moving towards a single government for the region is likely to harm progress on these things.This one issue just adds to the multiple reasons I believe we should be 1 municipality. In terms of bike lanes. I think one of the biggest reasons the cities have been better at implementing them then the Region is the type of roads that owned and maintained by the region are very different then the roads the cities maintain. If there was one planning department maybe there would be some consistency with how bike lanes infrastructure is implemented in the Region.
I don't think "the region is aligned with me on this one issue" is a good argument for a single level government. You have to believe that the region as a whole is a better scale to manage all our issues at...and fundamentally I think having the flexibility of having some issues managed at a more local scale is a better...but that's just my opinion.
As for ION Phase 2, I don't foresee it actually happening. The costs are bullshit. The politics are bullshit. But it is also a poison pill at this point...we can do it, but we also cannot do anything else.
To me, the region and cities managing different types of roads is actually a reason to have two planning departments. In fact, if the region would get out of the business of accommodating driveways, it could actually be a very good thing.
But I really don't think consistency of infrastructure is the biggest obstacle to cycling in the region. I'd be happier if planners were less concerned with consistency and more concerned with just building something.