Bike lane plan spinning it wheels

Nice thought to have protected bikeways in Toronto, physically separating cyclists from pedestrians and from cars, making it safe for all.

Unfortunately the plan to do them on University Ave., from Richmond St. to Wellesley St. will not work. It does not connect anything to anything. It will just provide politicians like Rocco Rossi a wonderful excuse to say that “we are not a bicycle city,” as it will not increase the number cyclists significantly.

In fact, the purpose of having protected bikeways is to increase the current number of cyclists. It would allow people that are not currently cycling because of fear of cars an opportunity to try it in a safe way. This is especially attractive for children, older adults, as well as inexperienced adults.

Nevertheless in addition of having physical separation on arterials, when roads have speeds for cars of 40 km/h or higher and/or over 5,000 cars per day, you need to connect places of origin to places of destination. You need a minimum grid. Toronto is approximately 20 by 40 kilometres; it would be ideal to have a protected bikeway every 2-3 kilometres so that you would have 8 going East – West and 16 North South.

An initial trial should have at least one route North - South from Eglinton Ave. to Lakeshore Blvd. (along University or Yonge) and another East – West on streets like Richmond St. and Adelaide St. all across the city. Ideally the trial should have three in each direction -- a mini grid which then could expand.

People who are not currently cycling in Toronto will not begin to do so just because you have 1,300 metres of protected facility that does not connect places. The existing cyclists will be the only users, maybe adding a few that are using other roads and will move over to try this one, but they are not additional riders.

 It will not show any significant increase and it will not serve to make the case for protected bikeways in Toronto. Actually it will have the opposite effect.

The only positive aspect is that it will educate people on what a “protected bikeway can look like”, even if it is on the wrong side of the street. It should always be uni-directional, on the left, from slow to fast: sidewalks for pedestrians, protected bikeways, then slow car lanes, then fast cars.

Why is it that Toronto is so timid, so scared of thinking big and acting big?

We have one innovative pedestrian crosswalk at Yonge and Dundas, the “scramble” that allows a time for pedestrians to walk in all directions, and three years later we have two. In similar cities like Christchurch, New Zealand, they try one, it works, and within six months they have all the crossings along that main street as a scramble.

Toronto announces it is bringing public bikes and then the director of transportation announces on CBC that “the system is not proven” and the decision is postponed. He does not realize the places like Copenhagen have had it for 20 years; Paris has 20,400 public bikes for the last two years and Montreal now has its very successful Bixi program.

Finally we were going to get the first protected bikeway. We know that in addition to the bikeway itself, we need connectivity, a grid. We get 1.3 kilometres! Can you imagine cars or transit if they just had 1,300 metres of streets or rails at a time? Where could they go to?

Thinking small, acting smaller.

Let’s keep this in mind as we choose our candidates for Mayor and Council across Ontario. Toronto is already good; let’s elect the right people to make it truly great. Who has the vision, political will and managerial capacity to get things done? Who is not afraid to think big and hopefully to act big? There are some good municipal staff all over the GTA, and they deserve to have the best politicians providing the necessary leadership and support. The community has the obligation to think carefully who to elect and to participate in the process.

About Gil Penelosa

Comments

[...pat.]

You're so right! It's a bridge to and from nowhere. The idea of a 3x3 grid is a good start: what roads would you choose?

[DavidV]

I ride every day and I agree that it's nice to have a big lane down University, but how do those people safely ride east west to get there?

I'm also always worried that drivers will start to think that cyclists have to be on streets that have bike lanes, and no other places.

[Aaron Lamb]

There is also a scramble at Yonge and Bloor, but your point is well taken. They should be all over the city. Yonge and Eglinton, Queen, King and Yonge etc...

[Bob Walker]

It is being called a test... when is the winter test being scheduled? We need an overall, comprehensive plan for traffic in this city that includes cars, transit, cyclists and pedestrians. I support such a plan.

Another example of the scatter-shot approach to almost everything by the Miller City Hall and one more reason why this version of the City Council needs to be dismissed and replaced.

Robert Walker in Ward 31 - Its Time To make A Change For A Better Toronto.

[J]

In regards to the scramble, sometimes I feel they are underused, for example at Yonge and Bloor in the morning rush, very few people actually walk diagonally. It makes sense at Yonge and Dundas though, where students rush out of the subways and there is much less sidewalk room to stand and wait.
But overall I agree that we need to be more bold with bike lines, having a small portion of a road is not going to get me feeling like its more safe. We need more east west streets downtown, and north south streets coming from north of bloor going all the way downtown to be safe for cyclists.

[Brent Sienna]

I've finally figured out why cyclists need protected lanes. Bikes need protected routes mostly because cyclists need protection from their own stupidity. They can feel safe in their little lane while they disregard just about every traffic rule they are supposed to follow, little things stopping at stop signs, oh the indignity of that.. expecting a cyclist to come to a full stop they might lose momentum! Might lose their life too if hit by a car but that momentum is much more important! Also blowing through red lights as no traffic "seems" to be approaching, hope that extra two seconds you gain is worth the lifetime of pain you are risking. Also weaving through traffic to get ahead of everyone else so they can be first and risk being squished between two cars. I don't see how protected lanes will solve anything except the incessant weavers but hey whatever floats your boat. Bikes already have an unlimited grid...it's called ROADS, or sidewalks as some of you seem to think are good to use. You are free to use roads all you like. All the rest of the traffic world asks is that you follow the rules to stay safe.

[Prince]

Thanks for the comments Gil. Although we unfortunately have to deal with piecemeal thinking and "pilot project" burn out, this is a good step in the right direction--exposing 905ers commuting out of the city every day along University to the concept of complete streets and street-sharing. Although this may be window dressing, it should enable an intense dialogue that will hopefully open the doors to more aggressive expansion of the bike plan and associated separated bike lanes. Not only is Toronto afraid of big thinking, but it is also a city full of "negative nancies" who do nothing but serve the never-ending negative tripe we are afflicted with. Perhaps, for once, we can be happy some progress is being made.

[Martin]

This is exactly what Montreal did on University St. there (a busy street. but nothing like University Ave. in Toronto) - people were biking in dangerous conditions, so the city responded to demand and created a separated bike lane, which now allows cyclists to safely connect from the Plateau residential area to McGill University and other areas downtown (like the very successful de Maisonneuve bike path, maintained and used year-round). "Thinking small, acting smaller" might as well be Toronto's motto.

[Mike Ritchie]

It's a ridiculous notion to believe that thousands and thousands of commuters will choose to ride a bike all year round with designated bike lanes. It just won't happen and those who believe it will are just serving their own interests. Would I commute to work on a bike if there was a dedicated lane along Bloor street. No. I barely have time as it is to make it to work either by car or by TTC. Reducing the street footprint to make use for a few more cyclists will just cause more congestion. I frequently drive along Dupont to the west end. The wonderful bike lanes from Lansdowne through to Dundas now cause a back up of vehicles. I have never seen a cyclist use this route.

Mike Ritchie

[BTL]

I used to cycle from my home in Long Branch to downtown. It was wonderful being mostly on side streets and the lakefront bike path. There were showers at work that were a NECESSITY if you worked indoors with other people. I only cycled in the warmer months, when it was not raining. I did it for fun and excercise. Now married with children, having to drop off kids at school/daycare and pick up again, the cycling has become impractical. I will do it for pleasure only on rail trails outside the city on the occasional weekend. This is all great for those single and free but those of us creating the next generation, we need to do what is practical which means to use the car! No wonder the city is broke.

[Pawan Krishen]

It is a great idea but a few questions that need to be answered:
1. Has any study been done on the viability aspect as to how many users there will be of these lanes and if this effort is worth it.
2. If the bicycles use the normal road where dedicated lanes are there will they be ticketed or else there will be more congestion. What steps are being considered to stop this from happening?
3. Who will pay for the maintainence of the infrastructure of these dedicated lanes? Is there any plan to introduce user fees or as usual the bill will be footed by the auto drivers as is the case everytime in some form of tax or the other.

There is urgent need to look into the longterm implications and have long term systematic plans rather than this type of adhoc knee jerk reactions. Our politicians need to wake up and take a closer look at where all the money and efforts are being put for the maximum benifit of the residents of Toronto.

[Clive Rayman]

Great article! Sarah Thomson at a Mayoral debate in Scarborough said she would have a grid for cyclists in Toronto...I do beleive she is the only candidate so far that has mentioned that. Sarah is also the first candidate that went public in regards to expanding the subway system funded by tolls. I think she has the vision,political will and managerial capabilities to lead this city forward. She certainly handled the toll issue... which most politicians shy away from doing.

[Andrew]

In Montreal, there are several scrambles downtown and without the need of painted markers on the road. Also, downtown's Boulevard de Maisonneuve is an excellent example of how to implement a protected bike lane (sidewalk, bikelane, car lanes) that runs for several kilometres through the city. Toronto need only look to our French cousins down the road on how to get it right.

[Andrew Grech]

I hope you aren't scared silly about other cars but have absolutely no qualms about biking and increasing your heart rate amidst all the polution. You should all be forced to wear air flters otherwise you might be sparing others but not yourself.

[Tanya]

@Mike Ritchie - its actually faster to ride a bicycle to most destinations downtown under 10 km than either a car or TTC.

@Gil Penelosa - remember we have gridlock so bicycles are not always slower than cars particularly in the downtown. Protected positioning closer to the curb does not allow for overtaking slower traffic on the left

[lukev]

These bike lanes which start and end in random places are WORSE than nothing.

We need to get the guys who did Montreal's bike routes to come here and teach our city a lesson.

[Justin]

I like this post. Toronto does think small and continues to do so in this regard. I think the collective stress of the average GTA resident (who is spending way too much time in their cars) is robbing him/her of any imagination to think outside of their very small box. The only thing that matters is reclaiming lost time and the only ideas that surface are the shallow ones based on a perception of what can be seen around them as there's no time and effort available to look deeper for the right answer. If you're stuck in traffic, of course the answer seems to be building more and wider roads - and bicycles can only appear to be in the way. Too bad perception doesn't equal reality though. There's just too much proof available now that suggests the more you accommodate cars, the more cars there will be, and hence, the more gridlock. Like it or not, we have to find ways to reduce our dependence on vehicles to restore our sanity as a society -- otherwise, the other 1M new residents projected to move into our city in the next number of years are going to crush our little boxes.

[lins]

I am sorry - but we are a car city.... period.....
WE need to drive for work, school, etc......

You cant tell me of the million + people that live in the city - that any significant portion are going to give up their cars and ride a bike - even with protective bike lanes, just the same that no one with a car is goign to give it up to take a bus.

Do I really want to ride a bike when it is 104 out side and get to work all sweaty? And dont tell me employeers will put showers in - please.......75% of biz's in the city are small business - where is the 7-11 or mom and pop corner store putting a shower and change room for both male and female.

And do you really think a significant park of the city will be riding in -25 degree weather in the winter no !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How am i suppossed to get my 2 kids to school on my bike. They are to little to walk and have to be driven. No there is no bus service.

We need to make more lanes for cars and more highways period, plain and simple. We need to ease congestion on the roads, but it will never be with bikes or buses.
What i want to know is why as drivers we are not banding together and forcing the city to make the traffic jam issue better.

I also want to know - what revenue the bike riders will be contributing to the city. Will they need licesses, stickers ???? all things car drivers pay.

As nice as it would be to ride to work, i cant - i have kids to drop at school - i live in the beach and work in hamilton. And before you say live closer to where you work, then you find a house I can afford, you tell my kids they have to change schools, you tell my bank to port my mortage (which they wont) and you make sure I qaulify for a new mortage, with reduced income and spouse out of work. Find me a new job, with benefits and match my senority and make sure that company does not close and i wont lose my job.

[GB]

I am bringing up 2 kids and don't own a car. It is tougher but you can get by. So that is not an argument. The fact is the nation's health is in a bad state. Our taxes will go up more and more to support our out of shape population. The car is reason numero UNO for this state of affairs.

The bike lanes the better!

[Jason]

Wow. Thats odd. I refuse to use the so called bike lanes we have now because they are just a suggestion and not a bike lane. I will definitely be using any barriered bike lanes. Think about it. The bike lanes we have now, would you let your child or grnadparent use them? The 8 or 80 rule. Of course not. Then its not fit to be used by anyone. Dedicated barriered bike lanes are safe and the only bike lanes we should be using. It will also prevent a situation where we have bike lanes when we have one mayor and no bike lanes with another. Its easy to cover up paint. Not so easy to pull out barriers. I hope Miller rapidly moves on this before Mr. No Vision Rossi turns this city into a drag strip.

[steveo]

Why are cars still allowed in the heart of the city?
If we have a common vision to reduce pollution and increase safety for our citizens then let's focus on that.
I ride every day (365). Everyone makes mistakes however all motorists have been courteous sharing the road with me.
Many of these initiatives are used to pacify some political guilt but do little to alleviate commuting issues (e.g.does Jarvis bike lane lead from somewhere to anywhere since I can use Sherbourne just as easy).

This morning I rode on the bike path next to the Lake and noticed a long BROWN stain in the sky over the Lake.
Lets focus on that.

[Harrison Fine]

No matter the proposal for where to put bike lanes, there will always be groups of people claiming they wont work. Jarvis and University are just two main examples.

Traffic is already very congested downtown, so to make suggestions that we should decrease the amount of available lanes to traffic for bicyclists is just ridiculous.

There is no room for bike lanes on these major roads, which is unfortunate. However, we do have a plethora of back end streets and smaller roads that go unused. So, why can't we put money into beautifying them and making great bike paths for the downtown core. Not only will we be solving this issue, the money will go into reshaping our city, not congesting it and causing more chaos.

[John La Fontaine]

>>little things stopping at stop signs, oh the indignity of that.. expecting a cyclist
>>to come to a full stop they might lose momentum!

It's not momentum that matters, but the energy and strain required to re-build momentum. A human powering a bicycle has a *very* small reserve of energy and muscle strength. When I bike I always give the right of way to pedestrians, but expecting a cyclist to come to a complete stop at an empty residential intersection just because of a stop sign is simply impractical.

[Tanya]

Why is it that Toronto is so timid, so scared of thinking big and acting big?

Because politicians are afraid of losing votes and their power..simple as that..Its not cars vs bikes...its corrupt politicians with tunnel vision that only leads up to the next election!

[My Humble Opinion]

It won't work because the objective is to get "thousands" of drivers out of their cars and onto bikes. Does council really think there are thousands of people that live downtown that drive? I'd be surprised if that is the case. I'd expect that most take the TTC, walk or bike already. These drivers are coming from outside the downtown core and are still not going to ride bikes. Improving the transit links between the areas outside the downtown core and transit downtown is the only way you'll get people out of their cars. I'd love to take transit but a choice between a 2+ transit trip or a 45 minute trip in my car is an easy choice.