News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.2K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 381     0 

General cycling issues (Is Toronto bike friendly?)

Toronto city hall to consider bike lanes on Bay St.

http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/814622/toronto-city-hall-to-consider-bike-lanes-on-bay-st/

.....

After much discussion with cyclists, local residents and business owners, city staff are recommending “sharrow†markings to designate shared lanes on Bay in the Yorkville area, between Cumberland St. and about 30 metres south of Bloor St. W. Although the proposal covers only a short stretch of road, it has been hotly contested.

.....
 
Sharrows are useless token infrastructure that just confer people like myself who would bike there anyway a little bit more safety. Instead, we should focus on the type of infrastructure that would actually get the silent majority that would love to ride but are incredibly scared to do so, on their bikes.

What I'm trying to say is: sharrows shouldn't even be debated, they should be standard on all our streets. If you are going to debate something you may as well go for something that will serve the greater population and not just the ~12% of us who currently ride their bikes downtown.
 
I was at the central consultation for Eglinton on Tuesday. I think the plan looks great, so I didn't look very closely at the details. There was one speaker who got a lot of applause who was basically opposed to any change, and seemed to think the best use for the dedicated transit lanes was to free them up for traffic or street parking. She, and the people applauding her, seemed to be really angry. Everyone else I heard speak was very positive about it.

I am optimistic that the plan will be largely implemented for a few reasons: apparently many businesses and residents are in favour; there seems already to be a general feeling that improvements to cycling infrastructure are overdue; and it is at least 5 years before any decisions need to be made, enough time for city politics to continue to shift in favour of bike infrastructure.
 
To think that you could cycle from the west end to Scarborough in a straight line in bike lanes the whole way is impressive. It unlocks so many possible trips that all but the most hardcore cyclists would never think of doing.
 
Yeah, a midtown cycleway would be a huge bonus. That said, having a Vancouver-style bikeway on a parallel side street is actually feasible up there. Castlefield-Roselawn-Broadway is more or less already connected (with a short diversion at Edith Dr.), and spans the entire length of the underground portion of the Crosstown. We could implement this today at very little cost. Part of the route already has designated bike lanes and every major intersection is already signalized. All you have to do is make some turning restrictions for cars at key places, build push-buttons for bikes and throw up some signage.
 
Hipster Duck said:
Yeah, a midtown cycleway would be a huge bonus. That said, having a Vancouver-style bikeway on a parallel side street is actually feasible up there. Castlefield-Roselawn-Broadway is more or less already connected (with a short diversion at Edith Dr.), and spans the entire length of the underground portion of the Crosstown. We could implement this today at very little cost. Part of the route already has designated bike lanes and every major intersection is already signalized. All you have to do is make some turning restrictions for cars at key places, build push-buttons for bikes and throw up some signage.
Click to expand...

That makes sense if and only if your only objective is to have as many cars as possible along Eglinton.

Drivers, pedestrians, businesses, and perhaps even drivers in the long term would benefit more from having bike lanes along Eglinton.
 
Well said, RC8. One of the reps pointed out that if you make Eglinton into a freeway, people will use it as a freeway - to get from one end of the city to the other - rather than as a neighbourhood.

Unrelated - I had heard rumours of the Shaw contra-flow bike lanes but had no idea they were coming so quickly. A couple of weeks ago a "bike signal" mysteriously appeared at Shaw and Dupont. Today there are bike signals the whole length of Shaw south to Dundas, a white line for street parking on the west side, sharrows in the middle, and a few contra-flow triangles painted into speed bumps. I believe they need to change the parking signage so that people park on the west instead of the east, and then when that side of the street is free they will paint the north-bound contra-flow bike lanes. There are also spray-painted hints that they may put in bike lanes between Dupont and Davenport which is an unexpected bonus. I am pretty happy about this since I use Shaw constantly.

Next they need to put in a bicycle interchange at Davenport and Oakwood, and a bike lane on Springmount (Springmount is a hidden alternative to Oakwood for getting up to St. Clair - nice gentle slope and no traffic) and then a contraflow lane north on Glenholme from St. Clair to Eglinton.
 
RC8 said:
That makes sense if and only if your only objective is to have as many cars as possible along Eglinton.

Drivers, pedestrians, businesses, and perhaps even drivers in the long term would benefit more from having bike lanes along Eglinton.
Click to expand...

My objective is to have something that's ready tomorrow rather than 8 years from now.
 
Hipster Duck said:
My objective is to have something that's ready tomorrow rather than 8 years from now.
Click to expand...

There is no reason not to implement a bike corridor along Castlefield-Roselawn-Broadway tomorrow on top of the Eglinton bike lanes 6 years from now.

They are two different pieces of infrastructure that would serve different users. I'm all for supporting both, but the bike lanes on Eglinton are in no way interchangeable with a bike corridor a block North.
 
calimehtar said:
Well said, RC8. One of the reps pointed out that if you make Eglinton into a freeway, people will use it as a freeway - to get from one end of the city to the other - rather than as a neighbourhood.

Unrelated - I had heard rumours of the Shaw contra-flow bike lanes but had no idea they were coming so quickly. A couple of weeks ago a "bike signal" mysteriously appeared at Shaw and Dupont. Today there are bike signals the whole length of Shaw south to Dundas, a white line for street parking on the west side, sharrows in the middle, and a few contra-flow triangles painted into speed bumps. I believe they need to change the parking signage so that people park on the west instead of the east, and then when that side of the street is free they will paint the north-bound contra-flow bike lanes. There are also spray-painted hints that they may put in bike lanes between Dupont and Davenport which is an unexpected bonus. I am pretty happy about this since I use Shaw constantly.

Next they need to put in a bicycle interchange at Davenport and Oakwood, and a bike lane on Springmount (Springmount is a hidden alternative to Oakwood for getting up to St. Clair - nice gentle slope and no traffic) and then a contraflow lane north on Glenholme from St. Clair to Eglinton.
Click to expand...

I'm really looking forward to this. There's a few other more places where contraflows are ideal - Brunswick from Barton to College (or at least Ulster, northbound cyclists could still use Major from College to Ulster), Huron from College to Phoebe (with connection to Soho/Peter Street, yes I know it parallels Beverley, but it's still a nice alternative to Spadina), Charles Street from Queen's Park to Jarvis, Logan from Danforth to Lake Shore (completing the short contraflow south of Eastern).

But Shaw is the biggest little win contraflows can provide. Logan (in the places where it's currently one-way) should be the east end equivalent.
 
Last edited:
I have discovered a massive flaw in the Eglinton Avenue protected bike lane plans: the proposed width is only 1.2 metres! There is a 0.9m buffer to the left of the lanes, but that is within the door zone so it should not be counted as part of the lane width. I can't find a more recent figure, but Option 1A (slide 11) in this presentation is what was selected. Note that Option 1B has considerably wider bike lanes, but was only chosen for a few blocks.

For comparison, the minimum dimension for a bike lane (for both Ontario and City of Toronto standards) is 1.5 m, with the recommended width being 1.8 m. The Sherbourne cycle tracks, which have received criticism for being too narrow, are 50% wider than the proposed lanes on Eglinton!

Separated bike lanes need to be WIDER than regular bike lanes, not narrower, since cyclists are trapped within them.
 
Cycling Think & Do Tank: Bikes and Barriers — Is it only the physical ones that matter to New Canadians?

http://spacing.ca/national/2013/10/...-barriers-physical-ones-matter-new-canadians/

.....

Discussions about cycling policy often revolve around desired infrastructure improvements, changes to transportation policies, and the funding needed in order to build bike-friendly cities. This emphasis on investment and infrastructure is based on a “build it and they will come” model that often neglects how cycling cultures develop in different places. While infrastructure investment is undeniably an important step in making cycling safe and attractive, recognizing that there are significant cultural and social barriers to adopting cycling for transportation is another important piece of the puzzle.

- In the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank’s work this summer, we developed a pilot project with partners CultureLink and Cycle Toronto’s unique BikeHost mentorship program for newcomers, and the University of Toronto’s DIY bike shop BikeChain, to research how to best encourage cycling uptake among new immigrants to Canada. Newcomers are an important group for exploring cycling promotion strategies for a couple of reasons. Within Canada, immigration is a vital part of growth in major Canadian cities, and increasingly it has also become central to sustaining population and economic growth in mid-sized cities across the country.

- Our past research demonstrates that behaviour change initiatives work best with populations undergoing significant life changes. By targeting interventions with groups like recent immigrants, we can better identify and remove their barriers to cycling, and implement strategies to encourage people to try out and eventually sustain new behaviours. In carrying out this work, we recognized that a potential barrier to trying out cycling for new immigrants is the set of expectations they arrive with on what it means to successfully integrate into Canadian society.

.....
 
reaperexpress said:
I have discovered a massive flaw in the Eglinton Avenue protected bike lane plans: the proposed width is only 1.2 metres! There is a 0.9m buffer to the left of the lanes, but that is within the door zone so it should not be counted as part of the lane width. I can't find a more recent figure, but Option 1A (slide 11) in this presentation is what was selected. Note that Option 1B has considerably wider bike lanes, but was only chosen for a few blocks.

For comparison, the minimum dimension for a bike lane (for both Ontario and City of Toronto standards) is 1.5 m, with the recommended width being 1.8 m. The Sherbourne cycle tracks, which have received criticism for being too narrow, are 50% wider than the proposed lanes on Eglinton!

Separated bike lanes need to be WIDER than regular bike lanes, not narrower, since cyclists are trapped within them.
Click to expand...

In reality the lanes will be a bit over 2 metres wide. The buffer will be usable for people to overtake other cyclists. If you ride in the city's existing bike lanes, you'll see that the bike lanes are always IN the door-zone. These would actually have an area completely beyond the door zone and a buffer in which you can still ride which will technically be in it.

They should be fine.
 
RC8 said:
In reality the lanes will be a bit over 2 metres wide. The buffer will be usable for people to overtake other cyclists. If you ride in the city's existing bike lanes, you'll see that the bike lanes are always IN the door-zone. These would actually have an area completely beyond the door zone and a buffer in which you can still ride which will technically be in it.

They should be fine.
Click to expand...

In existing (1.5-1.8m) bike lanes, people almost always leave the lane to overtake. Furthermore the 2.1 m width of the Eglinton lanes is physically constrained by cars and street furniture, so you actually can't ride right at the edges of it like you can on a bike lane. Your tires couldn't really get less than 30cm from the edge of the path, so even when we count the door zone, it would act as a 1.5m bike lane, which is exactly the minimum width for our current bike lanes. I seriously challenge you to overtake someone within the narrowest of our bike lanes.

It will be pretty much impossible to pass within this bike lane.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top