News   Mar 14, 2025
Paired High-Rises Proposed at Lawrence and Markham in Scarborough
 836     2 
News   Mar 14, 2025
UTPro Report Shows Toronto Construction Still Lags Behind New Population Growth
 822     2 
News   Mar 14, 2025
Touring St Lawrence Market North Before Farmers' Market April Return
 1.9K     6 

Cycling infrastructure (Separated bike lanes)

UntitledCyclist said:
I see little chance of Hogarth's loss putting the brakes on anything. Ontario is a sea of blue, once again. With no real change in the Tory majority. They will continue to rule unchecked by our increasingly poor semblance of a democratic system, and Ford will continue to target Toronto as a site of special attention and scorn, to the delight of his primarily suburban and rural supporters.
Click to expand...

I think that's true, but I definitely find it satisfying that Etobicoke sent this message, whether or not Ford is listening.
 
It is one less person yelling in his ear about it though, and I Feel she was a loud voice.

We will see, I still expect those Etobicoke ones to go. But with the Tariffs and real economic tensions and pressures about to hit this pronvince spending any money ripping out existing infrastructure seems even more nonsensical.
 
UntitledCyclist said:
I see little chance of Hogarth's loss putting the brakes on anything. Ontario is a sea of blue, once again. With no real change in the Tory majority. They will continue to rule unchecked by our increasingly poor semblance of a democratic system, and Ford will continue to target Toronto as a site of special attention and scorn, to the delight of his primarily suburban and rural supporters.
Click to expand...
Christine Hogarth was the MPP for Etobicoke-Lakeshore. Etobicoke-Lakeshore includes Bloor Street West/Kingsway in Etobicoke.

1740862579499.png

This quote was from her website at https://christinehogarthmpp.ca/listen-to-residents-remove-bike-lanes-on-bloor-street/

Effective and inclusive transportation is critical to people’s quality of life.

Over the past few months, bike lanes on Bloor Street have emerged as one of the most significant concerns among the residents in Etobicoke-Lakeshore.

Many in the community have brought their frustrations to my attention. I understand that most of you are not opposed to bike lanes outright but are opposed to the traffic congestion they create.

Road access is a precious resource that impacts public safety, local businesses, work and family time. Its allocation must be responsive to local needs. Whether you choose to drive, cycle, or walk, you have a right to move around in manner that is quick, convenient, affordable, and safe.

The City has noted that motor vehicle travel times are up since the implantation of bike lanes on Bloor Street. Statistics aside, for me, what’s concerning is the sense of unease in the community. “Someone is going to die because of these bike lanes” – that’s what a resident wrote to me. As a community leader, it is my duty to listen to this resident, and many like him who are speaking up against bike lanes on Bloor.

Let there be no doubt that I share your view about the unsuitability of bike lanes on Bloor Street, and your concerns about the possibility of new ones being added to other arterial roads. There is a place for bike lanes, but arterial roads are not those places.

Just like urban planners, policy makers, environmentalists, and traffic engineers, the community needs to have a say in what works for them. I have been listening to your concerns, and here’s what I have heard:

1. Increased Traffic Congestion: Many residents have voiced their frustrations. One among them noted: “Bloor Street has become a parking lot. It’s a gridlock all day long from Bloor Village West to Kipling. No one ever asked us, the taxpayers!”

A mother said: “I cannot get 3 kids to High Park for soccer practice during rush hour on a bike. My alternative is to choose a program that does not require me to drive along Bloor Street.”

2. Impact on Business: Shoppers and businesses alike have voiced significant inconvenience. “The bike lanes have discouraged me from shopping at the local stores on Bloor,” said a resident from Islington; and he’s not the only one. Another said: “Businesses are being affected… customers cannot get to them. Delivery trucks can’t get to them.”

3. Safety Concerns: Reports from residents also indicate near-misses and close calls. “Impatient drivers (are) making U-turns, taking short cuts through neighbourhood streets, blocking flow of traffic,” shared one resident. Another pointed out: “The drive has become far dangerous for drivers and pedestrians alike. It is very hard at certain intersections to make right turns further delaying traffic.”

4. Underutilization: Many have observed that bike lanes are often underused. A resident on Saybrook Ave, mentioned, “My doctors office is on Bloor Street and it used to take me 10 minutes to get there. Now (it) takes half an hour with no bikes in sight.”

5. Delaying Emergency Vehicles: There are concerning stories I have heard about bike lanes delaying firetrucks, ambulances, police vehicles. A resident wrote: “I saw a firetruck on an emergency run on Bloor and it had to wait for the cars to clear once the traffic lights changed. There was no manoeuvre room to get out of the firetruck’s way. Someone is going to die because of these bike lanes.”

Another shared: “The other day I sat on the Old Mill Bridge in a gridlock, bumper to bumper, and watched an ambulance try to drive through but of course cars could not move or pull over because there are white metal stacks dividing the unused bike lanes and the road. Such chaos!”

As a senior resident noted, Bloor needs “EMS more than it needs bike lanes”.

These stories are everyday reality for people driving on Bloor Street. I second these voices, and call for a rethink, starting with:
  • Removal of bike lanes on Bloor Street
  • Confining bike lanes to secondary arterials
  • Moratorium on new bike lane installations
  • Installing bike lanes where community supports them
  • A balanced and objective analysis of all bike lanes
Congestion costs. The price is freedom of movement, accessibility, emergency safety, and business viability. We need a pragmatic, not an ideological approach to bike lanes.
Click to expand...
The results of the 2025 Ontario General Election for Etobicoke-Lakeshore are as follows...
1740862499577.png

Looks to me that the constituents in Etobicoke-Lakeshore are pro-cycling lanes.

Christine Hogarth is now out.
 
She was a (if not the) driving force within the party pushing this (other than Ford perhaps), so surely this is going to have at least some impact - I really don't think any other MPP really cares that much to go all in.

As the costs and complexities of removing significant infrastructure roll in, I wouldn't be surprised if this quietly dies away, other than perhaps a token removal of a small section of Bloor in Etobicoke (which as far as I know wouldn't be particularly expensive at this stage - isn't it just a temporary installation currently ... sorry, I never drive down there).
 
As part of the Rockcliffe Flood Mitigation Project, culverts on Jane and Scarlett will be replaced with bridges and come with new raised cycle tracks:

Stantec out with a presser on it:

Stantec selected to lead two Toronto bridge replacements to increase resilience to flooding

www.stantec.com www.stantec.com

From the above:

Scarlett:

1740876939973.png


Jane will be similar.

Below, an MUP leading under the new Jane bridge:

1740877007572.png


Flood Mitigation Project Thread:

Black Creek at Rockcliffe Special Policy Area Flood Remediation and Transporation Feasibility Study

Flooding mitigation work is being funded, the feds are chipping in 129.3M and the City 193.7M https://www.canada.ca/en/housing-infrastructure-communities/news/2024/08/federal-government-and-city-of-toronto-partner-to-protect-communities-from-worsening-floods.html From the above:
urbantoronto.ca
 
nfitz said:
She was a (if not the) driving force within the party pushing this (other than Ford perhaps), so surely this is going to have at least some impact - I really don't think any other MPP really cares that much to go all in.

As the costs and complexities of removing significant infrastructure roll in, I wouldn't be surprised if this quietly dies away, other than perhaps a token removal of a small section of Bloor in Etobicoke (which as far as I know wouldn't be particularly expensive at this stage - isn't it just a temporary installation currently ... sorry, I never drive down there).
Click to expand...

Even better the voice in that riding now will probably bring far more data, facts in support of them and actual balance there.

That said , I still think some portion of the Etobicoke ones will go.
 
@Northern Light how do you evaluate the situation after the elections?

I looked at University Avenue and Yonge St. recently. Makes so little sense to remove cycle tracks as often the road lane was narrowed and some parking removed.

Please bring some encouraging words. Thank you.
 
If the bike lanes were just a mask for other things the PCs were/are doing (Greenbelt, Therme, etc.) then there's no real reason to continue with the facade of removing the bike lanes as the distraction served their purpose and the PCs have another four years to erode the natural environment of the GTA. We'll have to see if they actually want to follow through with such bad policy, but they weren't made to pay for it at the polls this time around.
 
Mihairokov said:
If the bike lanes were just a mask for other things the PCs were/are doing (Greenbelt, Therme, etc.) then there's no real reason to continue with the facade of removing the bike lanes as the distraction served their purpose and the PCs have another four years to erode the natural environment of the GTA. We'll have to see if they actually want to follow through with such bad policy, but they weren't made to pay for it at the polls this time around.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this. The bike lane thing was just a wedge for the election, so not that it is passed, it seems like a waste of energy for the province to police every bike lane proposal.
 
Andy_in_Toronto said:
@Northern Light how do you evaluate the situation after the elections?

I looked at University Avenue and Yonge St. recently. Makes so little sense to remove cycle tracks as often the road lane was narrowed and some parking removed.

Please bring some encouraging words. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, what to say.......?

How's this............. the hearing on the injunction against the bike lane removals as sought by Eco-Justice and Cycle Toronto is up next week, March 11th.
The judge in the case seemed to preview* (open to interpretation) that if the province didn't voluntarily pause any work, an injunction was likely.

The case is scheduled to be heard in full, April 16th. with a judgement rendered thereafter.

If you haven't read it, the Notice of Application is here:


I think I'll leave it there for now.
 
Thank you, @Northern Light. Let’s analyse the notice below with Gen AI. Do you agree?

Below is a detailed analysis of the Notice of Application filed in the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario by Cycle Toronto, Eva Stanger-Ross, and Narada Kiondo (the "Applicants") against the Attorney General of Ontario and the Minister of Transportation (the "Respondents"). This analysis examines the structure, relief sought, grounds for the application, legal arguments, and potential implications of the case, based on the provided document.

---

## Analysis of Legal Arguments
### Section 7 Charter Challenge
To succeed under section 7, the Applicants must prove:
1. **Deprivation**: The increased risk of injury and death from mixed traffic constitutes a deprivation of life and security. Evidence (e.g., accident statistics pre- and post-bike lane installation) will be key.
2. **Fundamental Justice**: The law’s arbitrariness, overbreadth, and disproportionality are well-argued, supported by the lack of evidence for congestion benefits and the government’s own contradictory statements.

The Respondents may counter that cyclists can use alternative routes or transportation modes, but the Applicants rebut this by highlighting the lack of viable alternatives and the necessity of arterial roads for many users.

### Section 1 Justification
If a section 7 violation is found, the government must justify it under section 1. The Applicants argue this is unlikely, given the absence of evidence linking bike lane removal to congestion reduction and the severe safety consequences.

### Injunction Prospects
Injunctions against legislation are rare but possible with a strong case. The Applicants’ arguments for irreparable harm and balance of convenience are compelling, especially with the claims bar preventing compensation for injuries.

---

## Potential Weaknesses
- **Causation**: The government might argue that the law does not directly cause injuries (e.g., cyclist behavior or traffic conditions are intervening factors). The Applicants must show a clear link between removal and increased risk.
- **Threshold for Deprivation**: Courts may require significant evidence that the risk is substantial enough to engage section 7, not just a hypothetical increase.

---

## Broader Implications
This case could:
- Set a precedent for Charter challenges to transportation policies.
- Influence urban planning and the balance between cycling and vehicular infrastructure in Canada.
- Test the judiciary’s willingness to intervene in politically charged legislative decisions.

---

## Conclusion
The Notice of Application presents a robust challenge to section 195.6 of the *Highway Traffic Act*, arguing that it infringes section 7 of the Charter by endangering cyclists without evidence-based justification. The request for an injunction is well-supported by the irreparable harm and balance of convenience arguments. The outcome will depend on the court’s interpretation of the evidence and its application of Charter principles, with potential far-reaching effects on public safety and transportation policy in Ontario.
 
I think this claim is a big fail for the same reason I think the business' case against the city is a fail. The province is doing something it squarely has the jurisdiction to do. If they're obligated to leave the bike lanes here because biking without a bike lane is a violation of your right to security of the person, then they're obligated to put separated bike lanes on every street in the province, to the door of everybody who rides a bike.

The interlocutory injunction would be granted to allow the judge to hear the argument, since there's no downside to pausing the work. But the claim won't succeed on the merits. That said, there are some weird decisions under s. 7 and we could get one at a lower level here that will get overturned by the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top
NEWSDATABASEMAPFORUM DASHBOARD SERVICESUTProLOG IN
CITIES