Toronto Queens Quay & Water's Edge Revitalization | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto

salsa said:
No. On a multi-use path cyclists are restricted by law to a speed limit of 20 km/h.
Click to expand...

So that raises the question: Why is bike infrastructure designed such that bikes are required to go slower than the cars they run alongside? I thought the point of this type of infrastructure was to put bikes on an more even standing compared to cars?

20 km/h really isn't very fast.
 
In relation to signals, I wish we had countdown timers on our street signals like they do in Shanghai. Seeing a countd
CDL.TO said:
So that raises the question: Why is bike infrastructure designed such that bikes are required to go slower than the cars they run alongside? I thought the point of this type of infrastructure was to put bikes on an more even standing compared to cars?

20 km/h really isn't very fast.
Click to expand...

I believe it was to improve the public realm more than it was to increase speed. Queens Quay originally had a speed limit of 50km/h which was lowered to 40km/h after the project, so vehicles have been slowed down too. It was never intended to become a 'highway', but a safer and multi-use space that could accommodate the large number of users that visit during the summer.

There is nothing stopping cyclists from biking 40km/hour on the road now, and its probably much safer to do so today than it was in the past since there is no traffic switching lanes anymore, and the speed limit for vehicles is now 40km/h.
 
I think that the old MGT along Lakeshore (Under the Gardiner) can simply be fixed up a bit and used for through traffic/commuters. There are barely any pedestrians along the sidewalk there, and the bike lane even separates from the sidewalk at many points. It can serve the cyclists who want to avoid the large crowds that will inevitably slow down cyclists along Queens Quay.

first.jpg

beyondRees.jpg

sign.jpg

http://dandyhorsemagazine.com/blog/...tour-for-torontos-waterfront-spadina-to-york/
 
It's crazy to me that some people would suggest that rather than creating safe and functional space for cyclists, that the cyclists should just go on the road instead.

WK Lis is right, cycling is still seen as a recreational activity rather than a functional form of transportation that merits dedicated infrastructure.
 
CDL.TO said:
WK Lis is right, cycling is still seen as a recreational activity rather than a functional form of transportation that merits dedicated infrastructure.
Click to expand...

But that's the point here... the MGT is recreational. If you want a quick commute without the crowds of pedestrians, there are alternatives. (Lake Shore, Fort York, Richmond/Adelaide)

Pedestrians outnumber both cyclists and vehicles here, hence why pedestrians have been given the most space and why the space seems to be paying more attention to pedestrians than other modes of transit. This isn't the place for dedicated bike lanes, and I'll go as far as even saying the amount of road space should've also been cut down by maintaining QQ as a 1 way road.
 
What is the purpose of differentiating between recreational bike infrastructure and regular bike infrastructure in a location like Queens Quay? It's the heart of a highrise residential community and has lots of employment.

Seems crazy to me to suggest that this isn't the place for functional bike infrastructure.
 
Tuscani01 said:
There is nothing stopping cyclists from biking 40km/hour on the road now, and its probably much safer to do so today than it was in the past since there is no traffic switching lanes anymore, and the speed limit for vehicles is now 40km/h.
Click to expand...

When the MGT was not yet complete and you still had to bike partly on the road, the 40 limit was fine (meaning that you'd be okay on a bike if you maintained a speed of 20-25, since most cyclists don't reach anywhere near 40).

On the MGT itself, 20 seems a bit low but it's like speed limits for cars: they're set low but the higher speed that drivers typically end up doing is actually still safe, traffic speed regulates itself with congestion, etc.
 
CDL.TO said:
What is the purpose of differentiating between recreational bike infrastructure and regular bike infrastructure in a location like Queens Quay? It's the heart of a highrise residential community and has lots of employment.

Seems crazy to me to suggest that this isn't the place for functional bike infrastructure.
Click to expand...

It's just never been a suitable route to me. It's so far south that its real purpose is more local than anything. It was the same argument I used when people complained about losing a lane of vehicle traffic. Queens Quay isn't a thoroughfare, it's a destination. Less than 100m to the North, there's a thoroughfare. If you want to get caught up in crowds, Queens Quay is your best option. If you want a quick East-West commute, Lake Shore is the best option.

There likely would have been much less possibility for pedestrian-cyclist conflicts had the bike path been put on the North side of Queens Quay, but then cyclists would be dealing with many more vehicular conflicts on that side. The path also could've been put on the other side of the ROW to avoid pedestrians, but judging by the number of vehicles driving onto the ROW, or the conflicts between streetcars and cars, that option wouldn't have been as safe as the current option.

The point is Queens Quay is packed during the summer. It's packed with pedestrians, it's packed with cyclists, and it's packed with cars. If moving quickly through is your goal, you are nuts to be trying to use Queens Quay in the first place. It's only going to attract even more people, so things are going to slow down even more as the neighbourhood changes and improves. There are times when the bike path is going to be full with pedestrians (after events at Harbourfront, when a Ferry arrives at the terminal etc) and the multi-use nature of Queens Quay is designed to accommodate the shifting needs of the street, not just people looking for a short cut through the neighbourhood.
 
Tuscani01 said:
I think that the old MGT along Lake Shore (Under the Gardiner) can simply be fixed up a bit and used for through traffic/commuters. There are barely any pedestrians along the sidewalk there, and the bike lane even separates from the sidewalk at many points. It can serve the cyclists who want to avoid the large crowds that will inevitably slow down cyclists along Queens Quay.
http://dandyhorsemagazine.com/blog/...tour-for-torontos-waterfront-spadina-to-york/
Click to expand...

Agreed. When it was used to bypass Queen's Quay during construction, it worked well for bike commuting. The sidewalk doesn't see many pedestrians and the concrete sections are not pleasant to ride on, whereas the asphalt designated for bikes needs to be redone.
 
Queens Quay may be packed at certain times in the summer, but what about the other 80% of the time?

I previously lived in Cabbagetown and, before that, Leslieville. I have friends in Parkdale. Queens Quay would certainly be the best way for me to get from my place to theirs.

I've had two jobs on Queens Quay. Plenty of people commuted by bike at each.

Cyclists should bike in a safe manner that accounts for conditions, in all cases. It bugs me that even when things aren't jammed with people there's still an idea that this bike infrastructure is recreational, not functional.

The Lake Shore path you suggest would be a very welcome addition to the bike network, too.
 
CDL.TO said:
Queens Quay may be packed at certain times in the summer, but what about the other 80% of the time?

I previously lived in Cabbagetown and, before that, Leslieville. I have friends in Parkdale. Queens Quay would certainly be the best way for me to get from my place to theirs.

I've had two jobs on Queens Quay. Plenty of people commuted by bike at each.

Cyclists should bike in a safe manner that accounts for conditions, in all cases. It bugs me that even when things aren't jammed with people there's still an idea that this bike infrastructure is recreational, not functional.

The Lake Shore path you suggest would be a very welcome addition to the bike network, too.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against people going over 20km/h here... Hell, I'd do so myself when the conditions are right for it. I just don't think WaterfrontToronto want's people to assume that they are going to be able to go as fast as they want 100% of the time here, as that would just lead to even more conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists, and can increase the severity of those conflicts. Speed is largely regulated by road/trail design, but you will always have those people who ignore this and disregard any warnings. The 20km/h speed limit allows for some regulation to get these people off the trail.

With Richmond, Adelaide, Fort York, Lake Shore, and Wellesley, there are many other options for cyclists now. There should be more, but I don't think each route should function the same way. Some are always going to be faster than others. For example, I don't think a bike lane along Queen would provide a quicker commute than Richmond/Adelaide, nor do I think it should. It's purpose would be more local than express. This is how I feel about Queens Quay. It's a good piece of infrastructure to get you onto a bike, and gives you easy and safe access to a range of other options. I don't think it will ever be the fastest way across town though.
 
Ignoring how short and of limited use Richmond, Adelaide, Fort York, and Wellesley are, I still have a problem with the idea that a bike path should be less functional than the road it runs alongside.

Agree to disagree?
 
CDL.TO said:
Ignoring how short and of limited use Richmond, Adelaide, Fort York, and Wellesley are, I still have a problem with the idea that a bike path should be less functional than the road it runs alongside.

Agree to disagree?
Click to expand...

But is Queen more functional than Richmond/Adelaide as a road? They both serve different purposes as well for cars. All I am saying is it's no different for bikes. Richmond/Adelaide is a faster option for cars to cross downtown, and just as they are faster for cars, they also happen to be faster for bikes.

If you want to get from point A to point B in the least amount of time, you don't take Queen. Making cycling along Queen an equal experience to driving will not reduce the time between A and B, as the time for cars isn't functional to begin with. Bikes would still need to stop for streetcars, deal with many more pedestrians, and deal with way more parked cars. (All of these things also slow down cars, so its not just an issue for bikes)

It's not a matter of it being less functional than the road it runs alongside, but more of it serving the same function as the road it runs along side.

But yes, agree to disagree.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top