General cycling issues (Is Toronto bike friendly?)

[facepalming_brooklynite]

Saw a bike protest ride on Bloor near Royal York the other day. They were taking up the entire westbound traffic lane instead of the bike lane, for maximum driver annoyance

There will be many more

 

[txlseries4]

I'm seeing an uptick in rides/protests so for anyone looking, here are some social media accounts of those organizing:
https://www.facebook.com/events/556394547111834 - Critical Mass Nov 29

https://www.instagram.com/fightforbikesto/

https://www.instagram.com/fridaysforfutureto/ - organizing Dec 7 ride from High Park to MPP Hogarth's office for a protest

https://www.instagram.com/eastendvsbill212/

https://www.instagram.com/bloor.bikecott

some advocacy groups amplifying rides/events:

https://www.instagram.com/cycletoronto/

https://www.instagram.com/thebikinglawyer/

https://www.instagram.com/communitybikewaysto/

https://www.instagram.com/ffsafestreets.toronto/

 

[TheGrimSweeper]

If Bill 212 was truly about just expediting Highway 413 - you would think the Ford government would want to quiet the noise on it now. It does them no good to get more people looking into it.

They have effectively banned the installation of any new bike lanes. Ripping up existing ones will keep the articles, protests and news going full tilt.

 

[81-717]

I'm just going to cycle in the middle of the traffic lane, as slowly as possible.

Hopefully I don't become a statistic, but it is an absolute guarantee that many will.

Or you can do the same thing on the sidewalk, it's an equally effective, but safer way of giving the finger to the removal of bike lanes and general hate towards cyclists from both sides (drivers and pedestrians).

I understand the passion and wanting to stick up a middle finger to the removal of the bike lanes, but caution that if bikes start holding up traffic on major arterials by taking up a full lane, the next shoe to drop will be outlawing bikes on major arterials.

My experience is most cyclist move close to the sidewalk. That's at least what I do when riding on Bayview or Mt Pleasant near Eglinton.

 

[PinkLucy]

Sidewalk riding is prohibited by by-law and isn't always safer (cars don't look coming out of or into driveways, for example). Pedestrians are also vulnerable road users, and already greatly dislike the scofflaws who do use the sidewalks, so I'm not a fan of going that route. Bikes can and should share the road but sidewalks not so much.

 

[81-717]

Sidewalk riding is prohibited by by-law

The same by-law enacted by those now trying to get rid of bike lanes entirely?? Too bad, if it helps get the message across then the ends justify the means.

Also, there is nuance that MUST be taken into account:

I think the blanket prohibition on biking on sidewalks has to end. Maybe you have to redesignate them as multi-use trails or whatever, but in a street like this, the appropriate place for a bike is not the car lane, it's the sidewalk.

Pedestrians are also vulnerable road users, and already greatly dislike the scofflaws who do use the sidewalks

Then they would hopefully get the message that ripping out bike lanes is in no one's best interests, including pedestrians and drivers.

Bikes can and should share the road but sidewalks not so much.

Bikes. Are. NOT. Cars.

We might as well shut down all multi-use trails in parks then, because bikes and pedestrians share those trails on a daily basis with no issue. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that bikes are more versatile than cars or pedestrians and are perfectly capable of doing both (sharing the road with either cars or pedestrians, depending on the circumstances), and enact by-laws that actually take that into account?? On a Venn diagram with pedestrians on 1 side and cars on the other, bikes would fall into the intersection between the two.

FWIW, the original post to which I responded suggested biking very slowly in the car lane to give the middle finger to bike lane removal, so if the goal is to do that then it's perfectly reasonable (and safer for everyone) to bike very slowly on the sidewalk instead.

 

[PinkLucy]

By-laws are municipal, not provincial, so no, not the same people.

Multi-use paths are wider than sidewalks, thus allowing for multiple modalities.

I didn't say bikes were cars, but neither are they pedestrians. And riding on the sidewalk sucks. They're narrow and crowded, particularly in the downtown. Bump bump bump over every crack.

I have cycled thousands of km every year on roads for a very long time and don't use sidewalks unless absolutely necessary and for very short distances. I also walk a lot and don't appreciate bikes on narrow sidewalks because they take up too much room and they don't bike very slowly.

Ford and his ilk would love to see us on sidewalks because they don't care about pedestrians either. No thanks.

 

[81-717]

And riding on the sidewalk sucks. They're narrow and crowded, particularly in the downtown. Bump bump bump over every crack.

I have cycled thousands of km every year on roads for a very long time and don't use sidewalks unless absolutely necessary and for very short distances.

That I agree with, and I myself generally only take the sidewalk for short distances when necessary. And even though I myself would generally stick to the curb lane on a wide suburban street with no bike lanes, I still agree with those who think the sidewalk is more appropriate in those cases (those sidewalks are mostly empty anyway).

 

[PinkLucy]

Toronto has made the GCN (Global Cycling Network-- these guys are great) show, and not in a good way: