Attaching Mirrors (& a Lot of Other Stuff) to My Surly Long Haul Trucker

I found attaching usable rear view mirrors to a bicycle with drop bars to be an exercise in futility, particularly with my Surly LHT which utilizes bar end shifters. There simply was no place to attach them that didn't interfere with the operation of the brake & shift levers. Whenever I did find a mirror that was advertised as suitable for attachment to drop bars, I found them to ultimately be either too small, shaky, and/or poorly positioned. That is, until I came upon the idea of attaching a second stem and bar. In a nutshell, this second bar provides additional "real estate" to which I can attach, not only mirrors, but also a handlebar bag and the lever for an air horn. As shown in the pictures, by attaching the bag to the lower bar, I then have sufficient space for a second set of brake levers, a Cygo-Lite headlight, a couple of "Incredibells" (I'm left handed, so one beside each left hand brake lever.) and a place to mount a GoPro video camera on the upper bar. My LBS, Full Cycle, installed Tektro AL726 cyclocross brake levers which I find quite useful, particularly when cycling around town in traffic. It also means that I now have three distinct hand positions with full access to brake levers. The Cateye Strada odometer is then mounted to the upper stem. It is the only brand I have found so far that can be mounted in this fashion on the stem. I purchased mine at Bushtukah in Ottawa on Richmond Road.

If you have a bicycle with a threadless stem and enough height on your steering tube to attach a second stem then this set up should work for you. First, I removed spacers equivalent to the height of the second stem. To allow for maximum versatility, I purchased an adjustable stem at Mountain Equipment Co-op (MEC) for about $22. I then cut a discarded handlebar to an appropriate length and attached  bar ends to each end of the cut bar. I already had a pair, but a pair can be purchased new for less than $20. (If you are in Ottawa I would suggest you head to Re-cycles Bicycle Co-op at 473 Bronson where they should be able to provide you with used parts at a good price.) To these I attached a pair of unglamorous but eminently useful bicycle mirrors purchased from Canadian Tire for $5 each, which I then wrapped with reflective tape. There are infinite possibilities for placement of the mirrors given the adjustable stem and the ability to rotate not only the second bar within the stem, but also the bar ends around where they attach to the second bar. Where I placed my mirrors ensures that my hands do not block the view in any way yet they are close enough to allow me to easily reach them should they need adjustment.

I then attached my handlebar bag to this second bar as well as the lever for my Samui Air Zound Cycling Horn.   Whether I am commuting in the city, or touring on the open road I find them extremely useful. In the city I am regularly checking my mirrors, keeping alert to traffic coming up behind me.  Having mirrors on both sides is invaluable when cycling down one-way streets.  When touring, as soon as I see an approaching vehicle, I immediately check my mirrors to see whether or not they will be meeting a vehicle coming in the opposite direction when they pass me.

Bell underneath light, behind left cyclocross brake lever. Odometer mounted on upper stem. Horn lever on lower bar, right side, immediately next to bar end shift lever.

Adjustable stem angled down.

Bent bar ends protrude outwards, allowing mirrors to be further away from handlebars yet in close enough proximity to outer brake levers to allow for easy reach to make adjustments to the viewing angle. Bag attaches to second bar, riding lower, & ensuring it does not block the headlight or the camera view. 

Cyclocross brake levers provide easy access to braking when riding in an upright position.

A bonus to the installation is that I now have a significantly wider profile in traffic. Vehicles have more of me to get around, and I find that I get that extra space. Not only do I see better, but there is more of me and my bicycle for the other users of the road to see.

Assigning The True Cost of Transportation

I haven't yet gathered all the facts and figures but I believe it highly unlikely that the taxes and fees remitted to the government as a result of vehicle operation come anywhere close to paying the full cost of the provision of highway infrastructure. I can already hear the vehicle owners screaming as they insist they pay too much already with their gas taxes and licensing fees. Let's do some number crunching on the back of an envelope.

First, let's consider what remittances the vehicle owner makes to the government directly related to their car ownership. I think they can be divided into the following categories:

1. Taxes paid when fuel is purchased.
2. Annual Licensing fees.
3. P.S.T. & G.S.T. paid on operating expenses such as maintenance & insurance.

I am now going to make up some numbers to calculate how much car owners pay. (I know these are ball park numbers.)

1. According to OntarioGasPrices.com Ontarians pay taxes of 14.7c/l plus 5% G.S.T. for gasoline. To make it real simple I will assume that the average owner drives 20,000 kms./yr in a car that uses 7 liters/100kms. and that gas costs one dollar a liter. Such a driver would consume 1400 liters of gas, paying $280 in taxes to the government.
2. Annual license fee of $72.
3. Annual additional operating expenses of $3,000 results in $390 of P.S.T. & G.S.T. payments.

So, it looks like an "average" car user can expect to pay at least $750 in taxes and fees to the government annually, depending on how much they drive. I'm willing to round that up to $1,000 per year and then double it again to $2,000 per year. I then multiply that by the roughly 7,000,000 vehicles on Ontario roads and I come up with a total vehicle owner contribution of $14 billion toward the cost of providing and maintaining our road network. Does that come even close to paying for unlimited access to tens of thousands of kilometers of roads across this province? What does it cost to build and maintain all these highways and byways? In Ottawa alone, we pay tens of millions of dollars every winter just to clear the snow.

Now, I also know that I haven't accounted for the vastly increased taxes paid by the trucking industry. However, they should pay more, as they are responsible for most of the heavy pounding our roads take.

Calculating the expenses involved in providing and maintaining our extensive public road network is a massive undertaking. First, we need to know what the province as well as every municipality is spending annually on development and maintenance of their roads. We also need to know the cost of policing these roads versus the revenue collected from fines. It would also be valuable to know the total number of lane kilometers in the province.

My goal in collecting this information would be to determine the total cost of providing the Ontario road network and compare it with the total amount of money paid by all drivers for this network. I understand that the network provides a benefit to all Ontarians, whether one drives or not, but I do believe that by far the greatest benefit is accrued to drivers. I simply want them to pay an amount commensurate with the service provided to them.

With this information in hand I would propose that we start to re-allocate the benefits more equitably. I am now going to again to the back of my envelope to paint a broad picture. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that after all the numbers are calculated, that the taxpayer provided subsidy for the use of the road network amounts to $1,000 per year. This is a subsidy not received by non car users. If automobile users are getting $1,000 transportation subsidy, every citizen should have access to the same benefit. The question is: How do you rectify this imbalance?

I have decided to engage in some "blue sky" thinking to get us to where I think we should be. First, I propose the development of a province wide "Transportation Card" which would replace the current driver's license. If you are a driver, it would include information about the class of vehicle you are permitted to drive. It also, however, could be used as a transportation pass for any transit system in the province, including inter city bus and train travel. As every citizen requires transport, every citizen would be entitled to receive a card. Public policy would determine the total amount of taxpayer provided subsidy to the transportation system. This would include the cost of providing a road network for all users as well as the provision of publicly funded mass transit systems. The per capita value would then be embedded annually in each card distributed to Ontarians.

Public policy would need to establish a hierarchy of what form of transportation receives the highest subsidy. I advocate that the most efficient and sustainable forms of transportation should receive the highest subsidy, such as walking, cycling and mass transit, with ultimately no subsidy being provided to individual automobile users. You are free to use your car, but expect to pay the full cost for such convenience. To develop a user pay system I would want gasoline taxes and licensing fees to move toward paying for the full cost of the road network.

The ultimate idea of the"Transportation Card" is that every citizen would be able to use the subsidy embedded in the card for the type of transportation they wanted. If the car driver wanted to use the entire $1,000 subsidy to pay for gasoline or licensing fees, go right ahead. Swipe your card at the pump until the money is used. Alternatively, it could be used for a bus pass or intercity travel. Use it to buy a bicycle. Spend it on whatever type of transportation service you want. However, the more efficient and ecologically friendly your transportation choice is, the greater the subsidy from the taxpayer, and the farther you will be able to travel.

I know I am in the extreme minority on this issue. The vast majority of people I know are wedded to their vehicles. I can hear the laughter already. It is hard for most people to imagine being without a car. The point is, though, that one day personal automobiles will be a thing of the past. The question is: What is the best replacement for such an inefficient system?

Another criticism would be that this is another form of "social engineering" as I am having the government try to shape individual transportation choices. But, don't we do that already by providing a taxpayer subsidy that promotes automobile use?

The idea of having the taxpayer pay for the infrastructure of an auto-centric road network was based on the twentieth century assumption that ultimately everyone would own (or at least want to own) a car. With that in mind it was a no brainer to keep subsidizing this system. We are beginning, slowly but surely, to understand that this is not sustainable into the future. We need to start thinking about travel in entirely different ways if we are to respond effectively to the twin threats of peak oil and climate change.

Ottawa Stadium Dilemma: Opportunity Missed?

In the summer of 2003 on behalf of the Community Council of Overbrook, I gave a presentation to the transportation committee of the City of Ottawa. In it we detailed how we could greatly increase the value of the city owned baseball stadium located on Coventry Road by connecting it to the Transitway. Almost six years later, the stadium sits empty and forlorn, yet simultaneously the city fiercely debates counter proposals for two other stadiums that will require countless more millions of dollars of taxpayer money. It is yet one more example of a lack of long term vision. We built a $20 million stadium but failed to connect it to the transitway, even though it was less than 250 meters away. Now, we debate two more proposals, neither of which are accessible to the transitway.

What follows is a copy of the PowerPoint presentation we gave almost six years ago.

Good Morning.

Our community is one which, like much of Ottawa, has experienced significant growth in the past few years, particularly since the construction of the Ottawa Lynx Baseball Stadium in 1992. Such growth has put considerable pressure on our transportation infrastructure. Development has accelerated since 1999 and I would like to review these recent developments with you.

At 330 Coventry Road, at the corner of Lola Street, a large Canadian Tire Store.

At 100 Coventry Road, where it intersects with the Vanier Parkway, a Hampton Inn.

Last year, the Department of National Defense completed construction of a large complex at 295 Coventry Road, across the street from the Lynx stadium.

Also in the past year we have seen completion of a new intensive housing development at 1126 Lola Street. This fronts directly on Coventry Road, stretching from almost in front of the Hampton Inn property, to well behind the DND complex, which you can see on the far right of the screen

As we speak, even more development is occurring, with a 10 storey hotel complex and meeting facility being constructed at 200 Coventry Road. It is located behind the Hampton Inn, and in close proximity to the stadium, as can be seen in the photograph on the screen.

In addition, although I don’t have a photograph, considerable expansion has also occurred at the RCMP headquarters building at 1200 Vanier Parkway. Over 2000 employees are located in this one facility.

The question is, what is missing?

As you can see from the past few slides, very intense development has occurred, and continues to occur in a stretch of Coventry Road between Lola Street and the Vanier Parkway, a distance of less than 600 meters.

All this expansion, hundreds of new employees, lots of commercial activity, but no improvement in access to the transportation infrastructure to service this growth. It is the contention of the Community Council of Overbrook that a transportation solution exists less than 250 meters away.

Yes, less than 250 meters from the city-owned stadium is an under-utilized Octranspo transitway station. All it lacks is access. Improved access is one of the key components of our proposed Official Plan. As has been noted in this document, and I quote:

Shifting from an emphasis on mobility to one of accessibility means creating land use patterns that reduce the need to travel great distances across the city and encourage alternatives to car travel. More compact and mixed-use development throughout developing areas of the city and a stronger series of urban centres to anchor the transit system is essential to achieving our transportation goals.

The importance of such a link was recognized in 1991when the stadium was first developed. Once again I quote, this time from a study conducted by the Region:

From a regional perspective, the site is highly accessible being located at the intersection of the Vanier Parkway and the Queensway. However, while the site is easily accessible by automobile, there is relatively poor transit access. A pedestrian bridge linking the site to the transitway at the Train Station may be considered which would improve this situation.

The Community Council of Overbrook agrees with the goals of the proposed Official Plan and urges the city to include construction of a pedestrian overpass linking the Octranspo station at the Via Train station with Coventry Road as a priority in this document. As you can see on the map, an area of intense development is located on Coventry Road, on the north side of the Queensway. Valuable transportation infrastructure is located less than 250 meters from a potential access point, on the south side of the Queensway.

As you can see from this list, there are many businesses within 500 meters of a potential access point. At the top of this list is a city owned facility, the Ottawa Lynx Stadium. It would enjoy greatly improved access to our premier transportation infrastructure. As our city becomes more congested, it is vital that this link be established to maintain and enhance the viability of this excellent facility.

By reviewing this list, however, you can also see that thousands of employees and customers would benefit from improved access to mass transit on a daily basis.

To conclude, the key phrase here is improved accessibility.

This pedestrian overpass would connect the transitway with over two dozen large and medium sized businesses, linking thousands of employees and customers. It would greatly improve access to the Ottawa Lynx Stadium, an excellent city-owned facility. It would reduce automobile congestion and the resulting air pollution. It would increase use of the under-utilized Octranspo infrastructure at the Via Train Station. And, it is compatible with the goals of the proposed Official Plan.

The Community Council of Overbrook understands that development will happen in our community, as it will throughout the City, in the next twenty years and beyond. We feel it is imperative, however, that the necessary accessibility infrastructure be put in place to support and service this growth. This will help us ensure that we attain our ultimate goal of sustainable development. We then will truly find ourselves in a liveable, prosperous city.

Denley Nails It This Time

Review panel provides reality check

I don't always agree with Randall Denley, but this time, I think he nails it. He discusses a review of the most recent proposals for light rail in Ottawa. Here is his conclusion:

The key concept for councillors to remember is that this expensive new transit plan will only be justified if it can change our travel behaviour and development pattern, making the central part of our city one where people can live without cars. If it's all just to justify past and future suburban expansion, it's a bad way to spend public money. (emphasis added)

I couldn't agree more. I forwarded the following comments to him after reading his column:

It needs to be recognized that the bulk of our planning decisions for the design of our cities have been based on the assumption that we can always depend on the automobile. It is becoming clear to increasing numbers of us that this is not possible. The 2020 vision in Ottawa of increasing transit use will not be fanciful and a 'nice to have' in a few short years. The clamour for automobile alternatives will be demanded by more people because of the ever increasing cost of automobile use.

This fundamental redirection of our thinking is not going to be easy. It will require substantive compromise. The inner urbanites (self included) are going to have to deal with the pressures of increased densities in their own backyard. The suburbanites and beyond are going to have to accept that they can't have taxpayer supported instant mass transit at their doorstep while living in sprawling communities. Mass transit only is sustainable with sufficient density. If Kanata/Orleans/Barrhaven want mass transit, they will have to become dense enough to sustain it. They will not be viable simply as 'bedroom' communities.

We have been getting it wrong for a very long time. Whether we like it or not, we will be forced out of our vehicles as our primary source of transportation. The type of expansive living we have accepted as the norm is coming to an end within the next generation or two. The convergence of the pressures from peak oil and climate change are narrowing our options. The sooner that individuals and communities come to terms with this reality, the better off they will be in the future. Those that continue to deny reality do so at their peril.

City Transportation Committee Rejects Provincial Funding - And that is Good News!

The transportation committee has accepted the staff recommendation that the City reject $5 million in funding for an environmental assessment to expand Highway 174.

I went to the meeting this afternoon as I expected debate. However, it was accepted without dissent. I was pleasantly surprised, and have sent the following thanks to members of the committee:

Councillors,

I want to commend all of you for accepting the staff position on rejecting the offer of funding for an environmental assessment of expansion of Hwy 174. We must put an end to subsidizing inefficient automobile use. If there are to be subsidies, the most efficient forms of mass transit must be at the top of the funding list.

Within a generation, transformation of the transportation infrastructure shall be imposed on all cities as a result of rapidly increasing costs of energy. Urban areas that depend on expansive road networks shall be left behind. It is imperative that the City of Ottawa become forward looking in how it makes these decisions. We are already hearing increases in the call for efficient mass transit in this city as expansive suburban living becomes increasingly expensive. These voices shall get louder and stronger in the very near future as more of us accept that building a city that is primarily dependent on the private automobile is more costly in the short term and not sustainable in the long term.
I went to the meeting this afternoon assuming there would be some debate. I was delighted to see this pass so readily.

The decision we make with respect to mass transit in the near future will only be the beginning of 'transformation' of the transportation infrastructure in this city.
Thanks for sending a clear message to the Province that we are not prepared to continue to subsidize inefficient individual car use at the expense of needed investment in mass transit.

It's a great start. Now, if we can just transform this thinking into solid mass transit investment.

Questions from L'Image of Sandy Hill

Questions for the Candidate

1. Funding for Schools

What is the position of your party on extending provincial funding for religious schools?

The Green Party believes in a single publicly funded education system that treats all students fairly and equally. The UN Human Rights Committee has twice censured Ontario for violating the equality of its own citizens by funding Roman Catholic schools but not schools of other religions. The GPO does not support the John Tory solution of funding all faith-based schools. We believe that we should move to one school system with English and French streams.

What is your position for funding other types of private schools (ie. non-religious) like some which operate here in Sandy Hill?

As stated above, the Green Party believes in a single publicly funded education system. We do not support public funding of schools outside of the public system.

What is your party’s position on class size (maximum number of students in a classroom)?

The Green Party recognizes the success of the current government in reducing most class sizes to 20 from Kindergarten to Grade 3. We believe we must extend this effort through to Grade 12.

2. Transportation

What would your party do to provide an alternate route for the heavy truck traffic which currently passes through downtown Ottawa?

I recognize that the need to remove truck transport from downtown Ottawa is great. We must use it as an opportunity to make wise long-term investments in our infrastructure. Our first goal should be to reduce demand for automobile infrastructure by ensuring that a seamless inter-provincial mass transit system is included in any proposal. Second, recognizing that rail is a far more efficient use of energy, the province must begin to plan now for greater reliance on it as opposed to trucks for the transportation of goods. Third, any new infrastructure should be tolled to appropriate cost to users. Finally, we must ensure that we do not repeat the mistake of the King Edward Bridge and allow truck traffic to split apart another community.

3. Homelessness

How does your party plan to address the growing problem of homelessness in the downtown cores of our cities?

I believe that a society is judged by the way it responds to the needs of its most vulnerable. With respect to homelessness, particularly when combined with mental illness and/or drug addiction, our legacy is shameful. Our societal response is patchwork at best, with various agencies scrambling to do what they can for those in need. All too often we resort to “blaming the victim” for their plight. This is inexcusable in the 21^st Century. It is essential that the province develops and implements a comprehensive long-range plan that would ensure that acceptable housing is available to every citizen. We also must ensure that every individual who needs help with drug addictions is provided the treatment needed on a timely basis. Our failure in this area continues to compound problems that destroy neighbourhoods.

The Green Party proposes to address poverty through improvements in the minimum wage, indexing Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program payments to the rate of inflation, and adjust shelter allowances to reflect average local rents as defined by CMHC.
We also propose to divert future budget surpluses to create a $5 billion Long-Term Affordable Housing Investment Dedicated Fund. Annual interest from this Fund would be used to continuously build supported housing, seniors accommodation, affordable housing, rent-to-own housing, coops, co-housing, sweat equity housing, eco-villages.

4. University Education

Sandy Hill is home to many university students. How does your party propose to help these students meet the increasing expense of their education?

The Green Party believes that high tuition is counterproductive to developing both a competitive economy and a qualified, engaged workforce. To address this issue, the Green Party of Ontario will provide $500 million per year by 2011 to cap university tuition at $3000 average per year and college tuition at $700. The Green Party understands that in the 21st century Ontario needs well-educated citizens who are able to achieve their full potential.

5. Public Transit

What support will your party offer to Ottawa as it tries to improve its public transportation system and meet the challenges of future growth?

The Green Party of Ontario is committed to cleaner, cheaper, more efficient and safer forms of transportation. Ontario’s current transportation system is inefficient, expensive, polluting, dangerous and unsustainable. The Green Party envisions a transportation system that does not reduce our quality of life. Our Plan for sustainability would Divert 75% of all money budgeted for new highway construction until 2012 to public transit such as GO Transit, Toronto Transit Commission and Ottawa’s OCTranspo. This will fund the service improvements, expansion and infrastructure renewal required to create a world-class transportation system, relieve gridlock and eliminate the need for new highways.

Will your party support Ottawa’s public transportation system? If so, how?

As noted above, we would shift our transportation investments from highway construction to a far greater emphasis on public transportation.

6. Medical Care

We are fortunate to have the Sandy Hill Community Health Centre in this neighbourhood but the current wait time for Sandy Hill residents to register with this facility is two years. What strategies does your party propose to increase access to primary care for our community in the next 4 years?

The GPO’s health plan takes a broad approach to wellness, with an emphasis on healthy communities, healthy lifestyles and a healthy environment, not just health care. Reducing toxins in our environment, addressing the social determinants of health and encouraging healthy lifestyle choices are important components of the Green Party’s health plan.

Health care reform is urgently needed if we are to have a health care system that is sustainable and viable in the future. The Green Party plan will offer more choice, emphasize prevention and be accountable to the public. The Green Party of Ontario will provide Ontarians in the lowest 75th percentile of income an additional health care allowance of $1,000 per person, phased in over five years at $200 per year, for purchase of prescription drugs and/or care from any practitioner mandated by the Regulated Health Professionals Act (RHPA).

We will immediately increase the budget of the Ministry of Health Promotion from its current 1% level to 2% of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care’s budget. Since many illnesses result from lifestyle choices, the GPO believes that health promotion is fiscally prudent and will lead to improved wellness. These funds would be used to place nurses in the school system to promote healthy lifestyles and to assist in identifying youth at risk of long-term health problems.

We will increase the funding and effectiveness of primary and preventive health care by:

1) Creating a joint commission of stakeholders to explore best practices for implementation of preventive and primary health care by family doctors, with an emphasis on improved outcomes. This may include rewarding doctors who successfully assist their patients resolve risk factors such as obesity, smoking or uncontrolled high blood pressure.

2) Increasing support and incentives for multidisciplinary clinics and practices that team

doctors with nurses, dieticians, psychologists, counsellors, physiotherapists etc. This is particularly important for taking a holistic approach to mental health, addiction and lifestyle counselling.

Responding to Questions from the City Centre Coalition

1. Cities are seriously underfunded for the responsibilities they have been mandated. We favour uploading financial responsibility from cities to the Province for services previously downloaded. What will you do to resolve this longstanding issue?

The province must immediately assume responsibility for the full cost of social services. They should not be imposed on the municipal tax base. Municipal taxes currently have no relationship either to the cost of the service provided or to the ability of an individual to pay. Because of this inherent unfairness, taxpayers understandably put intense pressure on their councilors to eliminate tax increases. This leads to short term thinking on the part of city councils across the province. I am very interested in proposals developed by the Ottawa based Federation of Community Associations (FCA). As an MPP I would work hard for a full review of the provincially imposed municipal tax system.

2. We, along with other organizations, have filed a bump-up request regarding the proposed widening of the Queensway through various central sections of Ottawa. Our request is that the Environmental Assessment on the proposed project be done at the proper level of thoroughness in order to assure adequate protection of neighbourhoods through which the highway passes. Do you support our request?

I strongly support your request. The Green Party of Ontario is committed to cleaner,
cheaper, more efficient and safer forms of transportation. Ontario’s current transportation system is inefficient, expensive, polluting, dangerous and unsustainable. TheGreen Party envisions a transportation system that does not reduce our quality of life. Our Plan for sustainability would Divert 75% of all money budgeted for new highway construction until 2012 to public transit such as GO Transit, Toronto Transit Commission and Ottawa’s OCTranspo. This will fund the service improvements, expansion and infrastructure renewal required to create a world-class transportation system, relieve gridlock and eliminate the need for new highways.

3. We have asked the Minister of the Environment not to approve the inadequate Environmental Assessment done on a proposed project to build a highway through the Alta Vista Corridor – a project that would cause irreparable harm to communities bordering the corridor and to those downstream that would have the traffic dumped on them. Do you support our request?

I strongly support your request. Transportation systems must be designed to integrate well with the surrounding communities and bring us together not split us apart.

4. Very little provincial attention is paid toward promoting cycling and
   educating all road users about cycling safety. While the Ministry of
   Health Promotion pays much attention to helmet safety, such programs
   reach only people who already cycle. Do you support provincial funding
   for expanded cycling facilities and for programming to encourage
   bicycle use and awareness?

Yes I do. I am an active cyclist and enjoy cycle touring. It is a sustainable practice that enhances one’s health.

Liberals Continue to Expand Highways

I read in the Ottawa Sun this morning that Dalton McGuinty wants us to spend $104 million on expanding highway 174 to four lanes from two from Orleans to Rockland.

…the premier said the widening would go a long way to improving access to the road and will make the Queensway safer and less congested. McGuinty is also investing almost $50 million to widen Hwy. 417 from two to four lanes from the Queensway to west of Jinkinson Rd. and widening the Queensway from four to eight lanes from Hwy. 416 to Eagleson Rd.

Yesterday’s announcement comes four days after Conservative Leader John Tory was in town and criticized McGuinty for not doing enough to relieve traffic congestion in Ottawa.

I find it so curious that the Liberals and Conservatives like to proclaim how green they are yet they continue to promote 1950’s style thinking that encourages an ever expanding road network.

It is clear that you cannot build your way out of congestion. This has been documented time and time again. No where is the adage more true that “if you build it, they will come” than with highway expansion.

We know that we must begin to plan for the post carbon era as we are confronted with dwindling oil and gas reserves. We know that individual automobile transportation is the least efficient way to move people. Yet, in the face of this reality, all of the other political parties continue to promote highway expansion.

If we want a world class efficient transportation infrastructure, we need to stop investing in highway expansion that is designed to move automobiles, and refocus our efforts on mass transit that is designed to move people where they want to go, when they want to go there.