" increased time, cost and emissions related to detours was frustrating. "
" The closures have made traffic in the neighbourhood worse."
" diverted traffic (drove) down adjacent streets, back lanes and into areas that were less appropriate for cars"
" the majority of bike traffic originates outside the project area."
" safety is a real concern (including a)lack of proper signage"
" Many residents and stakeholders were unhappy with the process and generally feel improvements to the area aren’t benefiting them."
Does this sound like it is about the chaotic Assiniboine Bike Lane?
It isn't.
These conclusions are from an unpublicized city report about the model for Assiniboine.
The Argue Street bikeway in Lord Roberts (west of South Osborne Street), which was instigated in 2008 under area Councillor Jenny Gerbasi, has been found by city researchers to be an utter disaster.
We were directed to this link by a listener, who wondered why the city did not trumpet this addition to their Active Transportation page with a press release (Good question).
http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/ActiveTransportation/PDF/2010-09-09-ArgueStreetBicycle-COMMUNITY-REPORT.pdf
We know that the city failed to consult properly with residents about Argue, and that led to this recent survey by researchers. The City even cited the Argue fiasco in the tender for consultants for Assiniboine:
PART D SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS
D2.2 Experience with the development of the City’s first Bike Boulevard (Argue St closure done through the WinSmart Program) suggests that the public consultations required (public Open Houses and Public Hearings) for the development of Bike Boulevards is inadequate to properly engage the important stakeholders that are affected by the project. As a result the City intends to enhance the Public consultation component in future Active Transportation projects such as the Assiniboine...
Yet despite this assertion, the City of Winnipeg managed to duplicate the failure of the Argue St. process and ignored basic methodology like direct mail, door-knocking, or holding an open house in the affected neighborhood.
THE CITY CLAIMED THEY HAD LEARNED FROM THE ARGUE STREET EXPERIENCE BEFORE WORK ON ASSINIBOINE EVEN STARTED, THEN SCREWED UP THE SAME WAY ALL OVER AGAIN.
(With massive consequences for not only downtown residents, but for area employers, the Manitoba Legislature, tour bus and taxi companies, and seniors and the disabled...)
Councillor Gerbasi has pleaded for support, insisting that these problems can be fixed after the fact. As we see, it has taken 2 years to deal with the complaints of Lord Roberts stakeholders.
And lo and behold, what is the first "way to improve Argue Street"?
Some Next Steps:
1. In order to make any changes to the closure between Berwick and Walker, the City will need to begin the process to legally re-open Argue to vehicle traffic.
We shall see if the city even responds in tomorrow's court hearing to the complaint of the stakeholders that the city failed to take the legal steps to alter Assiniboine traffic that they allegedly took to close Argue, that now must be reversed.
The cost of to fix the Lord Roberts neighborhood, which would include the survey and report, legal process to re-open the street, "temporary measures that will accommodate vehicles and provide traffic calming on Argue" are unknown, but sure to be a FRACTION of the cost to fix the mess caused by Gerbasi's pet project downtown on Assiniboine.
She knew what went wrong on Argue, and did nothing to stop the same mistakes on Assiniboine.
She seems to believe it is appropriate to spend public monies on half-baked schemes to benefit the bike lobby, and then spend more tax dollars after the fact to remedy the consequences of her decisions on her ward.
She seems to forget she is not running unapposed on October 27th and voters in Fort Rouge have a choice.
