Moving beyond "downtown vs. suburbs"

[junior43]

The outer areas of the 416 consider bicycles to be recreational, not transportation. Putting bicycle lanes out of sight in the river valleys, does that. Otherwise, the arterial roads would eventually have to reduce the speed limits on them to 50 km/h, or (horrors!) 40 km/h.

Another reason the suburbs consider them recreational is because they don't want to ride 15+Km's to work (and back) daily.

Personally, if you're going to put bike lanes in the burbs, they should be to route people to GO/TTC stations. There would be such a small percentage of bikers for these distances (to downtown) it's totally impractical to inconvenience the evil car drivers. And you can change the speed limit to whatever you want, they'll still do 80.

 

[ehlow]

Another reason the suburbs consider them recreational is because they don't want to ride 15+Km's to work (and back) daily.

Personally, if you're going to put bike lanes in the burbs, they should be to route people to GO/TTC stations. There would be such a small percentage of bikers for these distances (to downtown) it's totally impractical to inconvenience the evil car drivers. And you can change the speed limit to whatever you want, they'll still do 80.

Yeah I feel there we should really explore the idea of using bixi or bike sharing around fairly urban rapid transit stations that aren't downtown like Eglinton on the Yonge line, or near Bloor west or the Danforth east, or North York centre.

It could expand the reach of the subway station into roads that are further from the main bus routes. People would take bike share to the station to use the subway.

In terms of suburban commutes like Richmond Hill to Mississauga, people will do whatever is faster or more comfortable, and there is rarely a situation where bikes win against cars in the that situation.

Downtown on the other hand, driving is very slow, parking is expensive, streetcars are also slow and full, so cycling wins.

 

[doady]

In terms of suburban commutes like Richmond Hill to Mississauga, people will do whatever is faster or more comfortable, and there is rarely a situation where bikes win against cars in the that situation.

It doesn't matter what is faster or more comfortable. People in Richmond Hill and Mississauga just live too far away from work to bike. The bike is simply not an option. But Richmond Hill and Mississauga are built out and they are intensifying the most, so in the future who knows... maybe they have a head start on the rest of the 905.

You can see the transit ridership of Mississauga is the highest by far in the 905. It's simply because people in Mississauga work in Mississauga, and right there that makes local transit a possibility. The next step is people living and working in the same neighbourhood. Then cycling will become an option.

 

[Memph]

Yeah I feel there we should really explore the idea of using bixi or bike sharing around fairly urban rapid transit stations that aren't downtown like Eglinton on the Yonge line, or near Bloor west or the Danforth east, or North York centre.

It could expand the reach of the subway station into roads that are further from the main bus routes. People would take bike share to the station to use the subway.

In terms of suburban commutes like Richmond Hill to Mississauga, people will do whatever is faster or more comfortable, and there is rarely a situation where bikes win against cars in the that situation.

Downtown on the other hand, driving is very slow, parking is expensive, streetcars are also slow and full, so cycling wins.

How would bike share work though? I mean you'd have to have stations near where people live too, no? The areas that aren't within walking distance of those subway stations aren't that dense so I'm not sure how feasible that would be. By the way, in my experience, Erbsville and Keats Way get a decent amount of cyclists by K-W standards. Laurel Trail seems to be the busiest, but after that, Erbsville and Keats are decent, though a higher proportion seem recreational compared to Laurel Trail.

As for suburban commutes, typically they're within the same suburb or to adjacent suburb.

For the Richmond Hill example, only 820 people commute from Mississauga to R.H. according to the National Household Survey, which is about 8 times less than you'd expect based on Mississauga's share of the GTA population. In terms of how many people commute to Richmond Hill compared to (approximately) what you'd expect based on the GTA population share...

Commuting to Richmond Hill from:

Richmond Hill: 10x more
Aurora: 4.5x more
Markham: 3x more
Newmarket: 3x more
East Gwilimbury: 2.5x more
Whitchurch Stouffville: 2.5x more
Georgina: 2x more
Vaughan: 1.8x more
King: 1.8x more
Bradford: 1.4x more
Toronto: 50%
Durham: 45%
Caledon: 45%
Brampton: 17%
Mississauga: 13%
Halton: 8%
Hamilton: 1%

Where do people who work in Richmond Hill come from?
Richmond Hill: 32.4%
Toronto: 21.2%
Markham: 14.2%
Vaughan: 8.7%
Other York: 12.3%
Durham: 4.6%
Simcoe: 2.1%
Mississauga: 1.5%
Brampton: 1.5%
Halton: 0.7%
Caledon: 0.4%
Hamilton: 0.1%
Other: 0.4%

So Richmond Hill mostly draws commuters from the Northern GTA, and rather few from the Western GTA.

Also, looking at mode share for Mississauga (2011)
Car: 80.3%
Transit: 15.9%
Walk: 2.3%
Bike: 0.4%
Other: 1.1%

Commuting Distance for Mississauga (2006)
<5km: 24.3%
5-9.9km: 24.5%
10-14.9km: 16.9%
15-24.9km: 20.0%
>25km: 14.2%

Granted this distance is as the crow flies, but still, 5km as the crow flies probably still translates to under 10km on the ground (even with winding streets), so a decent chunk of Mississauga residents could theoretically bike, certainly a lot more than 0.4%.

 

[salsa]

Why do people pretend that cycling is only for going to work? What about other things like going to the grocery store, or to the train station? I live in North York without ever having to drive a car, as I rely entirely on the TTC and my bicycle for all trips. It's not always faster, but I prefer to live healthier, save money, and not pollute the air that I breathe. If people think they need to drive anywhere they go, then that's their choice.

 

[James]

I really think the main reasons people choose not to bike is effort and complacency. Biking requires more effort, takes a bit longer, can be dangerous with vehicles on the road, and in the warm weather, will make you sweat. Not bashing anyone in particular but a lot of people don't want to experience any of those factors. People are so used to the comfort and convenience of driving, it's simply second nature to drive everywhere, especially outside the downtown core.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I really think the main reasons people choose not to bike is effort and complacency. Biking requires more effort, takes a bit longer, can be dangerous with vehicles on the road, and in the warm weather, will make you sweat. Not bashing anyone in particular but a lot of people don't want to experience any of those factors. People are so used to the comfort and convenience of driving, it's simply second nature to drive everywhere, especially outside the downtown core.

It doesn't help bicyclists when the roadway is designed for higher speeds and wide traffic lanes for the automobile. They could narrow the lanes, resulting in slower speeds (IE. 50 km/h), to create bicycle lanes. With the extra wide right-of-ways available (IE. grass or asphalt boulevards), they could create separated bicycle paths as well.

 

[doady]

Why do people pretend that cycling is only for going to work? What about other things like going to the grocery store, or to the train station? I live in North York without ever having to drive a car, as I rely entirely on the TTC and my bicycle for all trips. It's not always faster, but I prefer to live healthier, save money, and not pollute the air that I breathe. If people think they need to drive anywhere they go, then that's their choice.

You bike because you rely on the TTC and you don't need a car ever.

If someone is forced to buy a car to commute to work, then that means they have a car. Why would you bike to the grocery store when you have a car?

And it's not like there is no correlation between being able to use transit and being able to bike. You live in North York. It has three subway lines. And you are telling us you don't need a car, you can rely on the TTC, and that biking is a possibility for you.

If Mississauga had three subway lines, chances are more people in that city would go car-free and bike too. I think this is not surprising.

 

[salsa]

You bike because you rely on the TTC and you don't need a car ever.

If someone is forced to buy a car to commute to work, then that means they have a car. Why would you bike to the grocery store when you have a car?

And it's not like there is no correlation between being able to use transit and being able to bike. You live in North York. It has three subway lines. And you are telling us you don't need a car, you can rely on the TTC, and that biking is a possibility for you.

If Mississauga had three subway lines, chances are more people in that city would go car-free and bike too. I think this is not surprising.

North York is not an urban utopia where people can easily walk or bike anywhere. Those three subway lines don't serve me well other than for going downtown (and it's not where I work). It's a 10 minute walk to my bus stop, and a 15 minute walk to the grocery store. There are few restaurants and other amenities nearby unless I go to Yonge, which is either 30 minutes by TTC or a hilly ride with the bike. Suburb to suburb trips take at least twice as long with transit than with a car. But I still choose not to have a car, and if I can do it then it's possible for many others to do it as well. So to me it's laughable that there are people, who for example would live in a condo beside a subway station, but still drive to a Starbucks just around the corner.

Indeed it's not surprising that this life style is not as easy in Mississauga, where city planners in their infinite wisdom have still not built a single rapid transit line in Canada's 6th largest city, nevermind three. Last week I had the pleasure of experiencing their Sunday bus service as well. I'd love to use the GO trains more often, but it takes a while just to get to Union from where I live, and the Milton line (which I would like to use) has limited service. So yes I can agree with you on that.

 

[W. K. Lis]

North York's arterial roads are very, very wide apart. Compared with Etobicoke or Scarborough, it can take a long walk (in a blizzard) to get milk or bread to take home. They could have put in jogged roads, like Toronto did to create Dundas Street. but obstacles like the 400 series of highway and railways present an expensive wall. Worse are projects to improve connections, like in the Caledonia Castlefield area to put in an underpass under the railway, have been delayed or cancelled. Bicycle or walking remain a burden. The lack of arterial roads in North York have resulted in traffic jams because the cars have to funnel onto roads like Dufferin, Bathurst, Wilson, or Sheppard, because of the lack of alternative routes.

 

[salsa]

That definitely has an impact, not only on walkability but also on transit. Only a handful of areas have minor arterial roads like Senlac, Willowdale, Faywood, Caledonia, Cummer, or Avenue Rd, that help break up the large grid. However many sections of those minor arterials are not lined with useful retail, and they are served by short and infrequent bus routes like 14 Glencairn, 98 Senlac, 104 Faywood, or 117 Alness. So most people will still go to the major roads anyway.

But it could always be worse. When it comes to terrible road networks, Vaughan takes the cake. Especially this area bounded by Steeles, Rutherford, Keele, and Weston Road. I also cannot use small residential streets to bypass the huge roads when I'm on the bike, which is something that I can do much more easily in North York even over long distances.

 

[doady]

Yeah, North York is very poorly planned, they never built extra arterials in-between the existing concessions to reduce the distances, e.g. the distance between parallel bus routes. Compare that to Mississauga which built Glen Erin, Bristol, Mavis, etc. which are all busy bus corridors now. Long distance between corridors is not a big deal for motorists, but it sucks for transit riders, cyclists, pedestrians. I think also if arterials are closer together, they don't have to be as wide, which is good for pedestrians, but in Mississauga some of the roads are six lanes, so maybe not...

North York is not an urban utopia where people can easily walk or bike anywhere. Those three subway lines don't serve me well other than for going downtown (and it's not where I work). It's a 10 minute walk to my bus stop, and a 15 minute walk to the grocery store. There are few restaurants and other amenities nearby unless I go to Yonge, which is either 30 minutes by TTC or a hilly ride with the bike. Suburb to suburb trips take at least twice as long with transit than with a car. But I still choose not to have a car, and if I can do it then it's possible for many others to do it as well. So to me it's laughable that there are people, who for example would live in a condo beside a subway station, but still drive to a Starbucks just around the corner.

Indeed it's not surprising that this life style is not as easy in Mississauga, where city planners in their infinite wisdom have still not built a single rapid transit line in Canada's 6th largest city, nevermind three. Last week I had the pleasure of experiencing their Sunday bus service as well. I'd love to use the GO trains more often, but it takes a while just to get to Union from where I live, and the Milton line (which I would like to use) has limited service. So yes I can agree with you on that.

I agree there is not vast difference between Mississauga vs. North York, but no doubt North York is more developed.

Suburb-to-suburb travel is different problem, that probably should be GO's domain. You could take the York U bus to Square One, for example. It's pretty fast, and it will be even better once the transitway is complete.

Yeah, it taken awhile for Mississauga to finally build the transitway, but I don't think 100% to blame for that. Past 30 years Toronto hardly built any rapid transit either, and it's not Toronto's fault either.

Unfortunately, Mississauga grew during the Mike Harris era, with no subsidy for transit. Even now the subsidy is still not what it used to be. And that means poor Sunday service as well.

And even today, there is the threat of the Hurontario LRT being canceled by a new government. That's not Mississauga's fault.

 

[salsa]

For the most part, I don't blame Mississauga for their lack of transit, however it didn't help that the mayor had no interest in building any transit until very recently. While Toronto hasn't made much progress either, at least it was reasonably well served by the existing subways over the past 30 years (but not anymore of course).

 

[W. K. Lis]

That definitely has an impact, not only on walkability but also on transit. Only a handful of areas have minor arterial roads like Senlac, Willowdale, Faywood, Caledonia, Cummer, or Avenue Rd, that help break up the large grid. However many sections of those minor arterials are not lined with useful retail, and they are served by short and infrequent bus routes like 14 Glencairn, 98 Senlac, 104 Faywood, or 117 Alness. So most people will still go to the major roads anyway.

But it could always be worse. When it comes to terrible road networks, Vaughan takes the cake. Especially this area bounded by Steeles, Rutherford, Keele, and Weston Road. I also cannot use small residential streets to bypass the huge roads when I'm on the bike, which is something that I can do much more easily in North York even over long distances.

The then Township of North York could have helped by building connecting roads. Why wasn't Caledonia extended north to at least Wilson Avenue? Why wasn't Bridgeland extended east to Floral Pkwy. and Falstaff Avenue? Because people were able to use their car go get around from farm to farm to a crossroad store. Had to complete these days.

 

[DB9]

Parts of NW Scarborough is dense enough for bike travel with sufficient secondary roads slicing it (e.g. Birchmount, Huntingwood, McNicoll, Pharmacy, Midland etc.), yet there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to build bike lanes up there. It would greatly help the economically disadvantaged concentrated there.