©Physically separated bike lane network
Now that the Bixi bikes are officially on the street, we can get back to the business of the separated bike lanes for downtown. A not so secret side benefit of bikesharing is that it raises the profile of cyclists and creates more urgency for good bike networks for locals and tourists. This is something Councillor Minnan-Wong made a note of at the Bixi launch.
"My understanding is that Montreal had the separated bike lanes first and then Bixi, and that's why there was pickup and it was successful there," he said. "I plan to bring an omnibus bike report for downtown separated connected bike network to committee in June, and council in July."
His network would link Sherbourne, Wellesley, Beverley and John streets to an East-West path on Richmond Street.
"It's a recognition that cycling is a mode of transportation that is used by people in the city," Mr. Minnan-Wong said. "On Richmond Street, even if you take out one lane you're only removing 25% of the capacity."
To complicate matters, leftie Councillor Adam Vaughan (Trinity-Spadina), who endorsed New Democrat Andrew Cash for MP, bitterly opposes bike lanes in his ward.
All of which goes to prove what odd political times these are in downtown Toronto, where even pin-pointing the pinkos can be a tricky job.
It's a bit unfair to say that Vaughan bitterly opposes bike lanes in his ward; it's just that he doesn't really want them on Richmond or John, because he's got his own ideas for those streets.
Support is, however, growing for the downtown separated bike lane network. The Toronto Cyclists Union has supported it from the beginning. Councillor Pam McConnell has thrown her support behind the lanes. McConnell's ward includes Richmond east of University and Sherbourne, two key parts of the network. Councillor Krysten Wong Tam hasn't yet stated how she would vote for the network, of which Sherbourne and Wellesley are a part of her ward. It's not clear yet just how she feels about them though she did claim the planning for the Jarvis bike lanes was inadequate. Councillor Mike Layton, who claims he is one of a handful of councillors that cycles year-round, has said he supports separated bike lanes, but that he'll have to see the details before he can fully support Minnan-Wong's plan.
Mountain Equipment Co-op, with 700,000 members in the GTA alone (3.3 million countrywide) has put its support behind it (fully letter at bottom):
I understand the petition’s proposed network will be coming back to PWIC and Council this spring. As constituents we are asking you to support this network of separated bicycle lanes in the coming Council term.
These cycling infrastructure improvements would be very meaningful to our members, particularly recreational cyclists who are not confident urban cyclists, as well as cyclists with young children.
Toronto is far behind many major cities in the completion of its bikeway network. Montreal, Vancouver and New York all have extensive and continuous bikeway networks that are separated from traffic.
Vaughan, however, is not all that supportive of either this plan or of the cycling department in general:
But in a three-page March 3 letter to residents’ associations, Mr. Vaughan blasting “barricaded bike lanes,” adding, “The Bike Union … have chosen to work with Denzil Minnan-Wong and the new Ford administration first, and with the community only as needed.”
Wednesday Mr. Vaughan said he has never voted against a bike lane, and has improved cycling in Toronto. He cited Spadina Avenue. I noted that work crews in the past year have painted over the thin stripe for cyclists along the curb lane on Spadina, making the street more dangerous for bikes.
“The incompetence of city staff does not reflect my office’s efforts to improve bike lanes,” Mr. Vaughan said. “How many times have we called up staff and asked them to paint the bike lines back on? I can’t help it if Daniel Egan [Toronto’s manager of pedestrian and cycling infrastructure] can’t get his crap together. The city cycling department is useless, but to say that I haven’t done anything for cyclists is wrong.”
Wow, that doesn't seem very professional to just blame City staff. Vaughan failed to realize that the staff were replacing the fake bike lanes with sharrows. Even with the sharrows Spadina is a poor substitute for a comfortable, separated bike lane that people could get on St. George / Beverley.
Minnan-Wong's response is that "he can't please everybody" (though Mayor Ford would likely err on the side of pleasing motorists when it comes down to it):
“It’s about taking a decision,” he said. “When you take away real estate in front of somebody’s property and change the use, there is going to be controversy. I am not opposed to community consultation, but I am not going to go into the consultation spin cycle and spend another five years. I am very open-minded in terms of which side of the street to put them on, and what they should look like. I’d like to get a network approved and then let communities decide what their ideas are with regard to design and implementation.”
Full letter from Dave Robinson of Mountain Equipment Co-op:
Councillor Vaughan and Councillor Minnan-Wong,
I am writing to you on behalf of Mountain Equipment Co-op in Toronto, an outdoor retail co-operative store geared towards promoting self-propelled activities, including cycling. MEC employs 170 staff at its Toronto Store and 90% of our staff uses cycling as their preferred way to commute to work.
MEC Toronto staff has deliberated over the network of separated bicycle lanes proposed by Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong and wanted you to know our point of view before this matter comes to Council.
A continuous downtown bicycle lane system separated from traffic is proposed by Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, the Chair of the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee of Toronto City Council. The network is supported by the Toronto Cyclists Union, the York Quay Neighbourhood Association, The University of Toronto Graduate Student’s Union, the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Association and the ABC (Yorkville) Residents Association organisations representing over 20,000 people.
MEC has 700,000 members in the GTA, many in the neighbourhoods represented by these resident associations who use Wellesley-Harbord and St. George Street-John Street to access our store, to bring their bicycles in for service, purchase cycling accessories, and to commute to and from the downtown core.
What was proposed was a continuous network of bicycle roads separated from traffic
East – West:
- Harbord - Wellesley from Parliament to Ossington.
- Richmond Street from Bathurst to Parliament.
North – South:
- Starting at Prince Arthur on St. George, Beverley to John Street connecting to new bicycle lanes on Simcoe, via the Richmond Street bicycle lanes, to the Lake.
- Sherbourne Street from Elm Avenue in Rosedale just north of Bloor all the way to Queens Quay.
I understand the petition’s proposed network will be coming back to PWIC and Council this spring. As constituents we are asking you to support this network of separated bicycle lanes in the coming Council term.
These cycling infrastructure improvements would be very meaningful to our members, particularly recreational cyclists who are not confident urban cyclists, as well as cyclists with young children.
Toronto is far behind many major cities in the completion of its bikeway network. Montreal, Vancouver and New York all have extensive and continuous bikeway networks that are separated from traffic.
We are requesting the City of Toronto endorse and implement this network of separated bicycle lanes.
Thank you for your time and efforts in this matter.
Yours sincerely,
David Robinson
Sustainability and Community Involvement Co-ordinator
Comments
Antony (not verified)
This should get interesting.
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 10:55This should get interesting. The local Residents' Associations are being consulted for their opinions on this plan, and from what I hear the Harbord Village association will oppose it. I'm not sure what the rationale is - it could be:
I don't live in their area, so I didn't go to the meeting. Apparently no-one from the TCU or city hall was there either.
Without buy-in from the local residents, this could get ugly. TCU needs to organize local representation on these committees.
herb
I hear that the chair of the
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 12:56I hear that the chair of the Harbord BIA is a real ball-breaker, hates cyclists and opposes any kind of bike lane, even a simple white line, on their three blocks. In the letter that the Harbord BIA sent around they claimed how they gave space to cyclists but that cyclists just aren't satisfied. Bullshit. The three blocks of the Harbord BIA is the only portion that doesn't have bike lanes and they didn't give up one inch of car parking so the sharrows are just in the regular travel lane.
So separated bike lane or just the plain-jane variety, the Harbord BIA hates cyclists (or at least the chair has got the BIA wrapped around his finger) and won't do a thing for them. There is one bike store in the BIA; I wonder what their opinion is of the matter?
hamish (not verified)
I do wish people - MEC, CU,
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 11:52I do wish people - MEC, CU, RAs and other cyclists - would really stop to think about what is up for being done ahead of supporting things.
There's absolutely some good in what's proposed - specifically the connectivity as a necessary feature, and also finally doing something on Richmond/Adelaide - studied somewhat in 1992 and it was supposed to have an EA c. 2008 or so. And to do a good enough job on Richmond to make linkages to the west, we might well have to replant a batch of trees that are now planted on the south side of Richmond at 401's new sidewalk, and yes, narrow the sidewalk, as Mr. V and staff have gone ahead and restricted easy options with that recent project.
Sherbourne St. is due for repaving this year maybe, and it makes some sense to think about if, and it's a bigger IF in my view, the details and design can work well enough year-round for us.
Both Wellesley/Harbord and Beverly/St. George aren't that dysfunctional that some enforcement couldn't help out vs. how many hundreds of thousands to redo them?
And this is where the naivete and dare I say blindp faith of some should be questioned.
I do NOT think we can trust the Fordists with doing the right things for bikes, in areas that we truly need things done. Are we supposed to walk our bikes to this network, and then get our "laps" done there, while ignoring the rest of the City, and the dire needs for connection and good road surfaces and sooo many undone things that are already approved?
Where's the West End bikeways?
Where's the BLoor St. EA - or are they going to try to kill it off - and I'm suspicious!
Where's Lawrence?
Why not fix up the connections to either end of Wellesley/Harbord, and parts of it are in real need of repaving, and the City still hasn't gotten around to fixing up that danger spot on the eastbound curve vexed about maybe 2 ears ago.
Why not do a decent job of linking of the Poplar Plains etc. to the top of St. George - that's a nasty missing bit that's been long overdue.
Where's Bloor in the Bike Plan, and the direly needed bike lane on Bloor from Dundas St. W. over to Ossington?
Where's approved changes to Bay St. and btw, University Ave. would be easy to repaint for a good, direct, faster bike lane simply by narrowing the travel lanes a little bit and having 24-hour parking.
Will the City manage to maintain these bike lanes through the winter? They seemed content to save millions on snow clearing this year by not being so fastidious about bike lanes, as often the sidewalks and roads were clear and we had white line riding.
Why not link not just the retention of the Cycling Committee, but its expansion! back up to c. 12 members with sub-committees to any support of this proposal?
And between the politics and the at-times less than thorough work of the City in doing these facilities, we need to see detailed drawings ahead of approvals.
Given how Mr. Ford has trashed Transit City, and now there's an attack on the harmonized set of bylaws, and that same PWIC meeting has a report on Mayor Ford's Bike Scheme, the quick and less contextualized support by well-meaning folks may well translate into trashing of the Bike Plan for only puting costly pathways in parks, which doesn't always do good for commuters and women.
I think it's very dangerous to give quick blanket support to these guys and this plan, even though our climate carisis is truly a Problem.
Let them demonstrate these separated bike lanes on Queen's Quay, and College St. east of Spadina on the south side for a block, and maybe the westbound curve of the Harbord bike lane at Robarts Library and show good maintenance for a winter first.
hamish (not verified)
Yes, the Harbord BIA has
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 15:07Yes, the Harbord BIA has undue influence. Why should the businesses on Dupont be given a bike lane, where there are honestly fewer cyclists, but a key link in the Harbord lane is left without bike lanes, even though the sharrow installation in those four blocks are definitely better, just it's still not ideal.
There is now 24-hour parking, and there are plenty of parking spaces throughout these four blocks behind stores etc.
And sure the BIA may have had extra privileges here, but Mr. Vaughan and Yvonne could have stood up for cyclists vs. the compromise we now have.
The BIA head may be Mr. Neil Wright, and perhaps Nancy Smith Lea may go on record about how a LOT of work in surveying those merchants about bike lanes prior to initial installation was quite undercut at a public meeting.
vic
My opinion is that parts of
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 15:41My opinion is that parts of this plan are a waste of time. The Beverley / St. George bike lane wouldn't benefit much at all from being separated, and same with the parts of Harbord that already have bike lanes.
I'd rather have them focus the planning energy and money on bikeway expansion plans that would make a real difference.
How about leaving the existing bikeways alone, but creating separated bikeways on Bathurst or University, and Bloor (where there's HUGE demand) instead.
Otherwise, we'll end up spending a ton of money, political capital, and angry letters to the editor over something that doesn't add much to the existing network at all.
-Vic
herb
I have to disagree, Vic. It
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 17:09I have to disagree, Vic. It is 100% worth it. Cycle tracks have been shown to be much more popular with people than regular bike lanes (which are in turn more popular than nothing).
Part of this is the art of the possible. It is currently politically feasible to sell this plan: it is a continuous network through the core; it helps separate the bike route from car traffic, making it more comfortable for most people; it won't require taking out parking where there are already bike lanes; it will prevent cars from parking in the bike lanes; and it will create a nice network exactly where Bixi is starting out.
I'm all for separated bikeways on Bathurst and University, but Bathurst isn't at all close to this area and the lanes on University were voted down and many politicians are under the mistaken presumption that putting in bike lanes there will make car traffic worse.
Having ridden with you, Vic, I know you and I find St. George or Sherbourne comfortable to bike on, but the same isn't true for the average person. If we want to grow the number of cyclists out there we have to imagine what kind of bike facilities they would find comfortable.
Political capital is already being spent, both by advocates and by Councillor Minnan-Wong. If we don't support Minnan-Wong on this, I doubt he's going to try very hard to support any other project.
Ed
Cycle tracks have been shown
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 10:26How was this shown? Sure, all of us would much rather be riding along one of those Dutch bicycle highways, or cruising along something that resembles he Humber River trail on an uncrowded day, than flogging ourselves through the gridlock, impatient drivers, and awful pavement of present downtown streets. However, whatever separated bicycle lanes get built as part of this proposal will in no way resemble an off-road trail, nor those nice wide streetside uncongested trails you show us from a small Dutch town. So this "preference" is moot for the matter at hand.
Is Minnan-Wong committed to consultation and good design? Where were the discussions of where these separated bicycle lanes should go? Even with the best of intentions, a novice cyclist is not who I would want to be shepherding the major bike infrastructure project of the next few years.
What are the design criteria? If there are discussions with cycling groups behind the scenes, the rest of us haven't heard of them. I can point to many bad design ideas (e.g. hazardous P-gates and traffic light standards at Ontario Place) and non-existent maintenance (piles of sand and gravel and lots of glass, for example on the separated Fort York Blvd. bicycle lanes, or along The Queensway; crumbling pavement in existing bicycle lanes). In my experience, the more City staff put their mind to "improving" and "making safer" a bicycle route, the more weird hazards (and "Cyclists dismount and walk" signs) appear.
If there are people who have concrete knowledge of the design process, it should be made more public. If there isn't really a design process in place, all I can say is, "pig in a poke". Minnan-Wong is an experienced Councillor. I'm surprised that he is managing this project in such an opaque way.
herb
In a previous post I cite
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 12:47In a previous post I cite research that showed that cycle tracks in Copenhagen are more popular than bike lanes, and that the cycle tracks in New York are much more popular than just using the street.
In the 2009 City of Toronto commissioned survey, the highest priority cycling infrastructure were separated bike lanes, among commuter cyclists, recreational cyclists and those who don't even bike.
Here's the process: Minnan-Wong asked staff to report back to Public Works and Infrastructure in June with a report on proposed separated bike lane network. Much of the design criteria and proposals will come in that report. After PWIC votes on it, it will go to City Council for a vote.
I suggest you put your name down to speak at the PWIC meeting and provide your suggestions and criticisms there. I also think that City staff will be consulting the community on some level.
Random cyclist (not verified)
I'm a woman who likes to ride
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 14:53I'm a woman who likes to ride my bike. I want safe places for my kids to ride. After seeing what is possible in other parts of the world including NYC, Spain and the obvious Netherlands - I want separated bike lanes here too.
I'm tired of white men arguing about what's best for the rest of us. Can't we stop arguing amongst ourselves - it's so f'n counter productive and I'm sick of the negativity.
hamish (not verified)
A significant part of what
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 09:52A significant part of what motivates me to give time at City Wall over the years, as an unpaid white male, is to provide more equitable and safe biking conditions in TO. That's in all parts of the city, though the core tends to have more cyclists for a few reasons.
Wanting good design, not trusting the City on design/installation/maintenance/ issues, is sadly very necessary, even ahead of having a LOT of distrust of what Mr. Ford and company are truly up to. One example is how Transit City was trashed.
While the anonymouse writer may be tired of the alleged "negativity", as we're apparently going in to a large financial shituation, along with the other issues, it actually makes a lot of sense to kick this all around a bit. And how can my strongly supporting Richmond/Adelaide and wondering where Bloor St. is be construed as negative?
Yes, hurry up and do it - but even under Miller the City was quite prepared to paint a white line over essentially rubble (eg. Wellesley) and expect happiness - I disagreed....
Antony (not verified)
Well said. If you are a
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 15:16Well said. If you are a white male aged 20-40, our the existing bike infrastructure already meets your needs.
Of course, that makes it complicated for white 20s males to advocate for them...
Ed
Well said. If you are a white
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 09:03Why yes, white males 20-40 are immune to bollards and P-gates smack-dab in the middle of bike paths, broken pavement that wouldn't be out of place in the less-nice parts of Detroit, taxi drivers swerving randomly without signalling, lack of connections between bicycle routes, gridlocked cars blocking streets from curb to curb, glass, gravel, streetcar tracks, traffic lights that never change for bicycles, Tim Horton's customers parking in the bike lane, stupid facility design, opening car doors, bicycle theft, snow, ice, sleet, or gloom of night.
Oh, sorry, they actually aren't immune to any of this, and being more dedicated (if not bloody-minded) riders they encounter these problems way more than all those "casual" riders who don't, really, actually ride all that much.
But, other than those few minor obstacles, yes the existing bike infrastructure fully and completely meets their needs.
(Not being a white male 20-40, sorry if I'm talking out of turn.)
lukev (not verified)
Councillor Vaughan needs to
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 08:49Councillor Vaughan needs to get over his ego. If somebody comes up with a good idea, then he has to cry about it.
Random cyclist (not verified)
Have recently returned from
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 14:27Have recently returned from Spain and experienced the impressive bidirectional buffered bike lane system in Seville, and also the one in Barcelona and how well they support each city's bike share program, I can only hope it is not long before a similar system is developed in Toronto.
John (not verified)
I hear a lot of cynical
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 17:38I hear a lot of cynical "can't do" crap in these comments, almost all coming from cycle warriors who clearly have no idea what it is like for a causal cyclist to ride in Toronto. Perhaps those who have kids will have a better perspective. I like riding with my family, but it gets pretty hairy in places, especially if you try to ride down to the waterfront, or across town to Riverdale Farm or the Distillery District (I live near Bloor and Christie).
When cycling becomes safe enough for my eight-year-old child, it will be safe enough for casual cyclists who currently refuse to ride in mixed traffic. Adam Vaughan needs to get ahead of this debate, because right now he sounds like the type of fearful, do-nothing councillor he used to ridicule (and for good reason).
By the way, the Harbord Village BIA board is mostly made up of realtors and bankers, not retailers with insight into main street vitality.
Kevin (not verified)
Vic wrote: "The Beverley /
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 20:02Vic wrote:
"The Beverley / St. George bike lane wouldn't benefit much at all from being separated, and same with the parts of Harbord that already have bike lanes."
Kevin's comment:
Have you ever been on the Harbord bike lane? Particularly the door zone bike lane bits? Where the most dangerous place on the entire road to ride a bicycle is in the bike lane?
I refuse to ride in the door zone. It do not care what the white paint says. Riding in the door zone is suicidal. I refuse to allow my 9-year-old daughter to cycle in the door zone. My 74-year-old mother refuses to cycle in the door zone. Her comment was "At my age, I'm not going to play tag with two-ton lethal weapons."
Separated bike lanes are about safety for families. Safety for all people, from 8 to 80 years old.
Antony (not verified)
Just thinking about
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 12:44Just thinking about contradictions in the Harbord BIA's opposition to bike lanes, in a quote from the Harbord Bakery owner: “This young man on his bike: I am happy he is shopping here. This older woman who has come in a car — how is she going to get here?”
On the one hand, "older women" can't be expected to get around by bicycle, because riding a bicycle is too dangerous. On the other hand, we can't reallocate road space to make bicycling safer, because old women need to get around by car.
At the same time, locals should have the final say in infrastructure decisions. But so many of our customers come from far away, we can't remove parking spaces to make room for bicycle infrastructure.
Ed
When cycling becomes safe
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 13:48Yeah, right,are you saying is that these casual cyclists have the common sense, motor skills, and situational awareness of an eight-year-old? If so, I have news for you: a separated lane one million kilometres away from any cars, but full of cyclists riding as if they were eight-year-olds, is not going to be a safe place to ride anyway. So if casual cyclists are going to take an eight-year-old's attitude to cycling, then for the safety of everyone maybe they'd best not ride at all.
If anyone has looked at the links that Herb has provided above, they'd discover that in Copenhagen the separated "cycle tracks" are no more safer than painted bicycle lanes. Riders think they're safer, but they think incorrectly.
Anyway, I look forward to eight-year-olds safely riding along Richmond and Adelaide in rush hour. The lanes will be separated, what could possibly go wrong?
herb
The Copenhagen study does not
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 23:26The Copenhagen study does not prove what you think it proves. More people bike on the cycle tracks than on the bike lanes. Cycle traffic increased by about 20% and accidents/injuries by only 10%. That means that for the individual cyclist the risk of injury is actually going down.
I go over this all in that post.
The preponderance of evidence is that cycle tracks are generally safer than bike lanes, and definitely safer than comparable streets without either.
The more recent study of Montreal cycle tracks by Anne C. Lusk et al, titled Risk of injury for bicycling on cycle tracks versus in the street compared the motor vehicle/bicycle crashes and injuries on six Montreal cycle tracks (physically separated bicycle-exclusive paths along roads) with comparable reference streets (a parallel street with approximately the same intersection frequency and cross traffic). The authors found 2.5 times as many cyclists road on the cycle tracks compared to the reference streets. They also found that the relative risk of injury was lower on a cycle track than on the comparable reference street (the average being 0.72 the relative risk).
Ed, you can't flippantly just take the data from one study out of context and jump to a conclusion.
Alan Heisey (not verified)
Ed I have a 7 year old
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 14:21Ed
I have a 7 year old daughter and 8 year old son.
They will be riding with me on the Richmond Street bicycle lanes when they are installed in 18 months.
Separated bicycle lanes will make people feel safer.
If people feel safer - more people will ride bicycles.
If more people are riding bicycles on our city's streets they WILL BE SAFER
as their presence in the road system grows.
Alan
hamish (not verified)
It does seem unwise to
Tue, 05/10/2011 - 09:10It does seem unwise to foolish to really get behind a proposal without seeing details, and without asking questions about:
- planning/responsiveness to injuries and origin/destination data,
- process eg. how come Bloor languishes while rebuilding 3 bike lanes and finally doing a fourth surges, and will there be any review of detailed designs ahead of doing?,
- winter maintenance and other year-round utility issues that could undercut other bike lanes
- and other items on the political side ie. can we truly trust the Ford regime to do good things for bikes? or is this a bankrupt the system moment by splurging on plausibly OK things, but no more money for the next Ford years? (Repainting Bloor for bike lanes from High Park to Sherbourne would only cost $200,000 as we now do bike lanes)
The latter point is more important as both Bloor and the Ford Bike Plan are slated for a report within the same agenda item. The new regime has been trashing more than fixing, and even though the existing Bike Plan is weak and delayed and misses Bloor, and there are some elements of good in the Ford Bike Scheme, urban cyclists should be wary. I totally support doing something on Richmond/Adelaide though - that's long overdue.
Let's get Queen's Quay started now, work on R/A and forgo the other other two in favour of fixing up roads, and finally beginning to address that east-west west end core bike travel issue, and Bloor St. would be a good starting point. Or also ask for a report on a physically separated Queen St. bike lane - wouldn't that be special and useful!!!
Bloor also has benefits to the subway in that making room for bikes on the street, makes room on the subway, which could make more room for motorists wanting to leave the mobile furnace at home.
herb
Hamish, I know you like to
Tue, 05/10/2011 - 12:25Hamish, I know you like to get into minute detail about these things and you like to hammer away at certain things regardless of the political winds, but that isn't true for everyone. The details are coming; right now we've got a visionary plan; we know separated bike lanes are popular; we know they work well; and we know it is politically possible.
Minnan-Wong had no good pro-Ford reason to support a separated bike lane network downtown. He's reaching across the political spectrum to propose and support this popular plan. There is support from the Bike Union, MEC, various residents associations, Pam McConnell. Bixi Toronto just started in the same area, bringing lots of new cyclists to the roads. All the more reason to give them some good infrastructure. There are also others who are waiting to see the report from staff in June before they support it.
For now it's good enough that most people can support it in principle. The research from other cities on cycle tracks is quite positive. They are popular and new cyclists find them more comfortable than regular bike lanes. There are best practices out there from which Toronto can learn and adapt for the specifics.
hamish (not verified)
Yes, the devil's in the
Wed, 05/11/2011 - 14:51Yes, the devil's in the details isn't it?
Like - if 3 of the 4 streets in this core proposal already have bike lanes, and only the Richmond/Adelaide one begins to address the crash/harm data, why not think and push for a separated bike lane on say, Queen St., or on Lawrence to go beyond the mere core? (and perhaps set an eg. for the CU?)
And there's maybe a dozen spots in our patchwork/notwork that need to have better linkages vs. rebuilding at some considerable cost perhaps the proposed new bike lanes. Or the minor detail of the Queen's Quay separated lane not quite getting done because of funding issues, so maybe it's a small contradiction between wondering where the push for a new set of projects vs. completing something that's already approved.
And it is a minor detail to wonder where are all the approved and in the works projects already in the Bike Plan.
And it's often small details in rough roads that will create a hazard or a swerve, though they do add up to a massive infrastructure deficit, worse for cyclists because we're supposed to ride in the gutter, and yet to take the lane for safety, while technically ok in the law, there's this small eg. of a cyclist getting ahead of a car on Bloor St. awhile back.
And yet, it's a little detail to worry about the Fordists cancelling that EA for the Bloor/Danforth bikeway, thinking that having BLoor bike lanes mightn't help just many cyclists, with four deaths since 1992 along core Bloor - but a bike way along B/D could also help both transit users and motorists wishing to avoid gas payin's.
Or a small point of why other cities can manage to paint colour on their asphalt but we can't.
Maybe I'm too small for TO.
Antony (not verified)
Good laundry list of
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 10:59Good laundry list of problems. To be fair, I never said it met our wants or that it was even good.
But statistically, we're the ones most likely to ride even given our crap infrastructure. Tough, show-off, testosteroney, determined dudes.
That we're already on the roads when women, elders, and children aren't is my point. We may not be happy, but we ride anyhow.
Ed
That we're already on the
Fri, 05/13/2011 - 11:46I'm getting more discouraged, though.
For example, I won't ride Queen westbound (Yonge to Roncesvalles) anymore. It's not the cars, the streetcars, or the traffic lights, it's the pavement. I wouldn't ride a separated bicycle lane ten light years from cars or traffic lights if it was paved the way Queen is.
Four or five years ago, the pavement was okay, and I rode that stretch of Queen regularly. Since King isn't in any great shape either, I'm left with the Martin Goodman Trail. Well that's nice unless it's really windy. I'd like an "inland" alternative that's at least a bit out of the punishing headwinds. But there isn't a decent one.
Weaving between cars to get through the gridlock downtown is unsafe enough to make me wonder why I don't take transit instead. Yes, I would use Adelaide/Richmond (assuming they're repaved....Richmond is bad to appalling these days). However, the 2 km of Adelaide/Richmond only amounts to some 10% of my ride. The rest will suck same as always.
hamish (not verified)
Being positive, how about a
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 16:48Being positive, how about a physically separated bike lane on Bloor St. between Lansdowne and Dundas St. W? While not in the Bike Plan, it's that sort of missing link with nasty bad rail underpasses that really needs improvements rather than the existing bike lanes, though I totally support doing Richmond/Adelaide..
herb
So in response Hamish you
Fri, 05/13/2011 - 09:15So in response Hamish you list off a litany of other problems to fix, but you fail to give any good reason to abandon ship.
The one thing you may fail to realize, Hamish, is that over a year people and organizations have been coalescing over this separated bike plan. In the municipal election we got Councillor Minnan-Wong as PWIC chair; a right-wing councillor who has taken a political risk to support this cycling plan. He didn't need to support any such ambitious plan - he could have just thrown a few small bones to cyclists and hoped that would keep them happy for a few years.
None of your reasons are good enough to abandon Minnan-Wong and the bike union. I fail to see how cyclists are going to end up in a better position by letting Minnan-Wong hang in the wind. If we don't support Minnan-Wong on this, I'm pretty sure that he's not going to support any of your ideas. Why should he if we don't support him?
I also wholeheartedly believe that this plan is great: Toronto needs some strong examples of separated bike lanes to inspire us and to get more cyclists on the streets. The benefits and popularity have been shown again and again in other cities and I'm glad that even a right-wing politician can see this. Perhaps this attributable to his learning to bike late in life and thus feeling more vulnerable on the street than the average hardened cyclist such as yourself, Hamish.
hamish (not verified)
May I for the third time here
Fri, 05/13/2011 - 12:19May I for the third time here go on the record as strongly supporting reworking Richmond and Adelaide for a high-quality separated set of bike lanes?
As the other three streets in this proposal already have bike lanes, are they as necessary to redo - perhaps at some real cost and hidden or less-obvious agenda - compared to the litany of other bike issues, which includes simply repainting core Bloor St. from High Park to Sherbourne.
I do find it somewhat perplexing and frustrating that this concept, backed up by reputable study of 1992, and with 5800 names on a submitted petition, isn't getting the surge that it should, and there have been four cyclists' deaths on Bloor since 1992, and none on any of these other routes I don't think.
Strongly supporting one of four, and having lukewarm support for a second, isn't letting a politician hang in the wind. Given the voting records/wreckords of the new power, and how the Transit City Plan has been deflected, I think it quite possible that the naifs at the CU and maybe elsewhere are overly excited and interested in something that does have some merit, yes, but that you could be getting played while other destructive agenda items are put through, and far many other things, like connectivity, other urban bike lanes, and road repairs fall away.
It took about 30 years for Wellesley to manage to get a bike lane from first proposal, Richmond was mentiond in the 1992 report, and we've got minimal along Bloor, including that needed part of Bloor in the Bike Plan from Sherbourne to Church St., and the key west-end part of Bloor from Dundas St. W. to Ossington didn't make it into the Bike Plan at all.
I think you/we need to be more suspicious and see proof of painting, patching and planning ahead of untempered enthusiasms.
For maybe the fourth time Herb, I do strongly support reworking Richmond/Adelaide but I also want to take time for good design and good process - and the other three roads in this plan already have bike lanes, albeit with connectivity issues.