The Cycling Unit at the City of Toronto has been collecting data of people's cycling routes. They've been collecting it via a phone app that collects GPS data while cycling. I recently got a copy of the City's preliminary map of cycling densities from that app thanks to John Taranu.

The City Core is interesting (we already know that the suburban cycling volumes are low). I'm going to assume that a lot of the people using the app were probably the less casual type; they're more passionate about cycling. They probably used the app mostly on their work commutes. Given that, it looks like that from the east most commutes are channelled into Danforth or Dundas East. From the west people end up skipping Bloor and going down to College, Harbord or Dundas. Or all the way down to Queen and then Adelaide/Richmond.

It makes me think that getting cycle tracks on Adelaide and Richmond was a huge win. Probably the biggest in the last couple decades. And I will say arguably, more important than Bloor bike lanes.

Next let's look at another map. This is from the recent survey of draft proposed routes from the City's ten year bike plan. Thanks again to John Taranu, this time for combining the two maps the Cycling Unit staff presented in the survey.

It's unfortunate that they decided to use the same green line regardless of whether it's a bike lane, cycle track or just a "signed route". The narrow green line means it's already installed; wide green that it's approved. The red lines are proposed and are more likely to be included in the bike plan.

There are some nice solid additions, including Bloor, Yonge and Kingston Road. But again looking at the core shows that despite having by far the highest volume of cyclists in the city that staff have decided to wimp out and do little. Sure we'll get Bloor and an extension of the Railpath (but not plowed in winter), but looking at the traffic volume map and it shows that all the cyclists on College, Dundas or the ones trying to connect to the new cycle tracks on Richmond and Adelaide will get next to no relief. Parkdale and further west is mostly out of luck.

Staff are taking the politically expedient route by ignoring the gaps on College in particular. College has the highest cycling traffic volumes in Toronto! College was one of the first to get bike lanes but looks like we'll have to wait at least another decade before anything improves there. For shame.

Is it wrong to think that we should be prioritizing where people are already cycling and making it safer and more enjoyable for them?

I recently got this excellent question about parking a cargo bike on a residential street's parking.

Hi,
My primary source of transportation is a bakfiats, and I've just moved to a new house where I don't have parking for it, and I've been parking it on the street (the back wheel has a wheel lock) during the day, then my husband helps me carry it up on to our front yard at night (because permit parking starts at midnight). I've just had a neighbour come and complain that I can't park a bike on the street. Do you happen to know anything about bylaws that would hinder a bike from being parked on the street during the day if no permit is required?
Thanks,
Angelique

Angelique told me that she had also followed up with Councillor Paula Fletcher's office and her assistant Erica Wood investigated:

Dear Angelique,

This has proved to be quite an interesting question that bounced from Permit Parking to Transportation Services to the Cycling division. As you can see in the response below, Jacquelyn Hawyard Gulati of the Cycling Infrastructure & Programs division has indicated that bike parking is legal when the bicycle is parked parallel to the curb.

I hope this is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Erica

Jacquelyn said that Chapter 950 of the Municipal Code actually does allow "bicycles to be parked on the street, parallel to the curb". Section 950-201 B:

"No person shall leave a bicycle on a highway except in such a manner as to cause the least possible obstruction to pedestrian or vehicular traffic."

Now we know. Thank you Angelique for raising the question!

So, in terms of getting a permit, it would exclude bicycles under Chapter 925-4 D but Angelique was just hoping to park her bike during the non-permit hours. So looks like we're free to park where we want during those open times.

Mind you, it's still annoying that we can't just purchase a parking permit for our bicycles. Or even better, a permit to place a semi-moveable bike rack next to the curb so we can lock up a few bikes.

The new Front Street design is based on vague planning ideas about "shared space" as if some fancy brick on its own would solve traffic problems between drivers, taxis, pedestrians and cyclists. At least as pedestrians we got some solid bollards, revealing that the City didn't really believe in the magic. Meanwhile as cyclists we get nothing but a few sharrows and a narrow strip between moving cars and the door zone of cabs. Photo: Cycle Toronto

How is this any different from all the other downtown streets that are urban hells for cyclists? Anyone who rides on Queen is very acquainted with the feeling of fear being squeezed from the left and worrying about the day when their number is called and a door suddenly swings open in front of them.

It's even worse that the "shared space" fairy dust is being advanced by the "progressive" planners. They're doing it with a distinct sparsity of data and in contradiction of other jurisdictions that have put specific limits on where shared streets makes sense and where they don't make sense.

Toronto's Chief Planner, Jennifer Keesmaat, has been enthusiastic about the space, and seems unconcerned about the implications for cycling:

Toronto's first 'shared' space - a mid-block 'welcome mat' for all in front of #UnionStation #TOpoli pic.twitter.com/rohBSqUBZI HT @haroldmadi

Some welcome mat. More like the door got slammed in cyclists face (the City even ignored recommendations from Metrolinx that better cycling infrastructure be considered).

Harold Madi, by the way, is the guy who led this design as well as the controversial changes on John Street. This is how they imagined this urban utopia in the EA:

Remarkably different from what we see now that it's finally reality.

We need rules for shared space!

The best example of sensible restrictions on shared space are just south of the border in New York City where their Street Design Manual spells it out clearly:

Consider on narrower streets (at most two moving lanes), or outer roadways of boulevard–type streets, with little or no through–traffic, and which are not major vehicular or bicyclist through–routes or designated truck routes.

Front Street, and even John Street for that matter, do not meet these criteria! There is lots of through-traffic and it is a major vehicular route. At least with John we still have the opportunity to take different measures for traffic calming and diversion (such as making sure only local traffic will use the street by diverting cars from going through the entire street). But Front Street is supposed to be a through street and is therefore is a completely unsuitable candidate for shared street.

That is, if we use New York's guidelines. We've got nothing else to go on.