Cycling infrastructure (Separated bike lanes)

[ShonTron]

I'm sorry, do you read what you actually write? A 70-fold increase over a decade is a fad?! Maybe in addition to likes, this system should include a way to vote troll points.

Now, we have two solid fairly protected bike routes that connect to Sherbourne. Wellesley/Harbord goes to Ossington (where it abruptly ends). Richmond/Adelaide with some wiggling through the park can be made to extend to Shaw. This almost looks like the start of a grid.

The Harbord route is useful if you head up Shaw (as long as a car isn't blocking the contraflow lane), then head east on Bloor (if your comfort level is good), or continue to Hallam. If only the Hallam/Lappin jog at Dufferin could be fixed, and an easy way to get on to Dupont or over to the Belt Line it would also be a really great east-west route.

 

[PinkLucy]

It was actually a little dangerous. Bikes waiting to make a left onto Sherbourne from Bloor were spilling onto the roadway, forcing cars into the middle lane, and backing Bloor up to about the DVP.

This city definitely needs more bike infrastructure, not less.

Or less cars on the road to free up more space for bikes

 

[44 North]

Something was up today... and I don't quite know what. I take Sherbourne daily and have never seen so much cyclist traffic ever in this city.

And it wasn't just Sherbourne. Bloor was completely packed with cyclists also. It didn't look like it was a group ride, or recreational. Just seemed like everyone decided to bike to work today. It was literally a continuous line of cyclists heading West on Bloor, and then a bunch of them continuing South on Sherbourne. The line along Bloor only broke up at red lights. Otherwise, it was non stop bikes flying by.

I pulled out my phone to get a picture, but I was driving and didn't want to risk getting caught.

It didn't feel like Toronto this morning.

Haha, I've had this realization too sometimes. I'd like someone like Malcolm Gladwell to do the research and explain what's going on. I recall coming out of Queen's Park station one time mid-summer and there was literally one constant stream of cyclists on College, many two abreast. I bike Carlton/College fairly often, but have never once seen anything like it on that route. It wasn't a group ride or event, but as if one day 25% of those downtown decided to take their bike to work.

 

[nfitz]

Or less cars on the road to free up more space for bikes

Good idea. Cars are a fad. They won't last.

 

[Napoleon]

Something was up today... and I don't quite know what. I take Sherbourne daily and have never seen so much cyclist traffic ever in this city.

And it wasn't just Sherbourne. Bloor was completely packed with cyclists also. It didn't look like it was a group ride, or recreational. Just seemed like everyone decided to bike to work today. It was literally a continuous line of cyclists heading West on Bloor, and then a bunch of them continuing South on Sherbourne. The line along Bloor only broke up at red lights. Otherwise, it was non stop bikes flying by.

I think there's quite a lot of demand for people that would like to cycle from the Danforth into the downtown. The Danforth feels safer for biking than Bloor itself and the DVP/Bloor has a bike lane to Sherbourne. Unfortunately, there was still no good way to get downtown. Now that Richmond/Adelaide connects, there's a direct conduit of respectable bike infrastructure to get people from the Danforth to the Downtown. Just speculation right now without any actual data.

For those people subscribed to the city e-mail list on the pilot project, they did send out an e-mail blast last week letting people know this infrastructure would be installed…maybe that's stimulated some of the new usage.

 

[mdrejhon]

The city's bike accident map shows a rather large number of bike accidents on College Street in spite of it having "bike lanes". Bike lanes do not make bicycling safer.

And that's why we now need far more protected bike lanes in Toronto.
It will make me safer as a car driver, and also makes bikes safer.

The number of people who ride bikes in NYC is a rounding error compared to the millions of people who take the New York Subway.

And bike infrastructure cost is a rounding error in a city budget, compared to the cost of a subway.
I think, bring on the addition of another transit mode!

Riding bikes and bike lanes are dangerous and I think that the whole bike thing is a fad. It is a craze that started growing rapidly during the recession around 2009 or so.

Fad!? Even as a car driver, I jaw-drop at your lack of history knowledge.
Are you aware of certain European cities that went the "bike fad" in the mid-1970s? (Hint: Amsterdam)
They weren't always a good bike city.
They started in the mid-1970s to become more bike-friendly.
Here's before and after.

Amsterdam in 1972

Amsterdam in 2015

(Credit: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/amsterdam-children-fighting-cars-in-1972/)

Lest you say you use the word "Europe" as an excuse, let's look at Minneapolis. Minneapolis began building their Bikeways network about twenty years ago. They began well before year 2008. An American city with nasty winters, just like many Canadian cities.

There are many more pre-2008 examples.

The number of people who ride bikes in Toronto is extremely small and I think you will find that the vast majority of the population agrees with me on this

I agree with you.
(surprised?)

But, I am smart enough to realize that this is regional, and I am smart enough to recognize there is a lot of potential at least in the central 416 core areas. Look at what is happening recently (see recent posts of the surprising jump in bikes). Even Sherbourne is much more popular at certain times of the day, than it used to be a few years ago.

When the bike lanes connect, and there's a more continuous network, people WILL come to bikes -- as they have in other cities.

What I am saying is that Toronto is too sprawled for bike lanes to make sense in the entire 905 area. However, I recognize major expansion of bike infrastructure in various areas, especially the downtown core, makes a whole lot of sense.

For example, it is easy to bike from Bathurst to downtown in just 15 minutes.
Or from Bloor to King Street, for that matter.
All faster than TTC.

If you say bikes are a fad, then condos are a fad.
Are they going to demolish the new condos in 5 years? Hah!
That's a massive part of the bicycle commuting audience, there, buddy!

 

[mdrejhon]

I think there's quite a lot of demand for people that would like to cycle from the Danforth into the downtown. The Danforth feels safer for biking than Bloor itself and the DVP/Bloor has a bike lane to Sherbourne. Unfortunately, there was still no good way to get downtown. Now that Richmond/Adelaide connects, there's a direct conduit of respectable bike infrastructure to get people from the Danforth to the Downtown. Just speculation right now without any actual data.

I think another great connector is eventually adding a small section of fully protected bikeway (the safer green-paint curbed kind) on the Bloor Viaduct to Sherbourne, that will very quickly become another popular route for bike commuters from the Danforth area. A painted white line will definitely not do, and it will definitely lose one car lane, but cars roar fast over these bridges, with the excess road capacity relative to the rest of the completely unexpandable Bloor/Danforth. I hated driving Danforth/Bloor during rush hour when living in Riverdale area, but I recognize the excess road capacity on the bridge, and the large latent Danforth bike commuting demand.

 

[mdrejhon]

I think you misquoted me, mdrejhon. Cuz I never wrote that.

Fixed, it was a quote editing error -- was trying to later break quotes into multiple separate quotes.

 

[rbt]

I'm sorry, do you read what you actually write? A 70-fold increase over a decade is a fad?!

Keeping rocks as pets went through a million-fold increase over a 6 month period; then died.

The size of the increase isn't indicative. The staying power (growth continues after a decade) is the important evidence.

 

[TOareaFan]

Keeping rocks as pets went through a million-fold increase over a 6 month period; then died.

The size of the increase isn't indicative. The staying power (growth continues after a decade) is the important evidence.

The pet rock craze would have survived if we built more pet rock infrastructure (just kidding...seemed an easy line)

 

[mdrejhon]

Keeping rocks as pets went through a million-fold increase over a 6 month period; then died.
The size of the increase isn't indicative. The staying power (growth continues after a decade) is the important evidence.

This is quite true, but don't forget the condo boom. That's permanent bike ridership.
And as long as the infrastructure is nurtured, we see the successes of other cities that do.

China Now Backpedalling To Reinstalling Bike Infrastructure Again:
That said, places like Beijing, China, destroyed their bike infrastructure in their expansion of automobile infrastructure. There was once a time when roads in Beijing and Shanghai were full of bikes. Now they have among of the world's worst traffic jams, (including one where some people were stuck in their car for several days during the 9-day traffic jam). Even anecdotes by the long-time Chinese say they now have far higher stress driving than when biking. Several Chinese cities are now backpedalling partially, reinstalling cycle infrastructure in parts of their cities, and installing bike sharing systems, amongnst spetacularly rapid subway expansions only Toronto can dream of (building a massive multihundred-station London UK sized system in barely more than the same amount of time it took us to do the York subway extension! But even that is overflowing critically, with people lining up for an hour outside stations amonst the world's worst subway jams). With the worst traffic jams, and the worst subway jams, it's no wonder that some bike infrastructure is being reinstalled in China to move a larger number of people to bypass congested modes of transportations, and re-boost the number of cyclists. Right now, China is going through the "automobile ownership dream" stage that North America had in the mid-20th century, but that will eventually gradually mature, as well. Of course, there is a demographical factor, but even richer people in Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and even sections of Minneapolis take their bike, so it doesn't have to be divided among social classes.

 

[mdrejhon]

--

An increase from 7 bike sharing systems in 2002 to 497 in 2012 sounds like a fad to me. The biggest increase was from 2009-2010 around the recession. Also a lot of these bike sharing systems (including the one in Toronto) have gotten into financial trouble. Bixi which used to run the bike share system in Toronto went bankrupt in 2014. My guess is that if TD has not sponsored "Bike Share Toronto" then it would have shut down. Most of these bike sharing systems are underused.

Bike sharing systems have existed since the 1960s

However, they only became popular recently thanks to:

• Technology that makes it easier to track the bikes
  (e.g. station electronics or bike electronics)
• Improve convenience even further, easier to find and take bike.
  (e.g. smartphone apps, evolution of easier parking, like bikelocker -> BIXI -> SoBi docks anywhere using electronic U-bar -- at any fence/rack/stopsign/pole/etc)
• Make them less appealing to theft
  (e.g. GPS tracking, the invention of credit cards, etc)

Also, BIXI is not a good financial example.
The smartbike systems, and other systems, covers operating costs better.
The SoBi bike-share systems are more financially self-sufficient.

They use newer technology to make bike sharing systems cheaper: Cheap racks by putting electronics , and installing solar-powered GPS trackers on the bikes themselves, and allowing them to be parked anywhere with their electronic U-bar, and combined with crowdsourced bike redistribution (credits given when returning bike to an official rack) to reduce operating costs. Currently, no SoBi system in the world has experienced the financial difficulties that BIXI type systems have experienced, and it is expected that this type of system will become far more popular as years passes.

For example, Ottawa and Hamilton now use SoBi-powered bike share systems.

Ottawa SoBi example:
Ottawa switched from their ultrasmall BIXI system to a small SoBi system. Ottawa's system is extremely tiny, with only 300 bikes, but according to their experience, has more ridership now than with the old BIXI, thanks to their ability to spread a bigger number of cheaper bike racks (no electronics) around, and letting people park bikes anywhere (away from stations, no full-station worry).

Hamilton SoBi example:
Despite fewer bikes in a more automobile-optimized city than Toronto, with hardly any rapid transit at all in comparison, Hamilton apparently out-bikeshared Toronto right out of the gate. Toronto has 1000 BIXI, while Hamilton has only 750 SoBi. Bike Share Toronto (in 5 years) only has ~4000 active members, while Hamilton (in 6 months!) now has over 6000 active members. Toronto's system went bankrupt, while Hamilton achieved 100% operational reimbursement right away in the first year.

Operating costs of SoBi systems in cities that have deployed them, have been remarkably low compared to BIXI! For example, the Hamilton SoBi system has the annual operating cost of only 1 city bus, it now serves more members (6000+) than the number of distinct users of a specific low-usage suburban bus (less than 5000 different people regularly using a specific suburban bus route annually), and more bike rides on bikeshare than annual passengers on an entire bus route (yet costs operationally less than operating just one city bus vehicle!). Unlike the bus that needs to be subsidized, the Hamilton SoBi system has 100% farebox recovery. Case in point, Hamilton has more paid members-per-bike (~8) than BIXI Montreal (~7), despite only starting up this year! Clearly, this is a good use of infrastructure money for almost any city, if a low-cost system is deployed properly.

Worldwide, BIXI-style-systems are not as good as the newer SoBi-style-systems (smartbikes with solar-powered GPS+LTE computers builtin) especially with the inconvenience of approaching a full dock -- newer SoBi-type systems have no such limitation as you can dock to any fence/pole/plain bike rack nearby. As bikeshare becomes more and more attractive by reducing cost and inconveniences, it attracts more members per bike, and becomes more feasible to deploy. Hamilton's SoBi now has Even Toronto Bike Share is considering scrapping BIXI and looking for an alternate lower-cost system that could be more convenient for users. (The $4.9M grant can cover a SoBi fleet stretching all the way from Liberty Village all the way to the Beaches).

My house is apparently within the SoBi zone, so I often grab a SoBi to the GO train station. Taking a SoBi randomly and spontaneously is now as easy as punching a 6-digit electronic code into the solar powered GPS tracking computer. Then I do a 1-way bike trip to the GO station to catch the train. There is no full dock station worry; since SoBi lets you dock the bike anywhere, even a parking meter pole -- like the one right next to the John Street teamway if I'm in a rush. No worry about weather or bike theft, I can go home a different way, like a bus, Uber, taxi, or a Kiss-n-Ride home.

Smart bikes move beyond the BIXI cost-inefficiencies, and as technology improves, becomes more popular even in lower-density situations.

(Credit: Santa Monica city council report)

For this system, you don't need expensive docks or kiosks.

With such smart bikes quickly becoming the preferred choice over dock-based bike share system -- at least for new small-scale and mid-scale deployments (2014-). A city can buy more than 2x the number of smartbikes for the same capital cost as a traditional "dock-based" bikeshare system which cost several thousand dollars and costs more than installing low-cost ruggedized solar GPS trackers on all bikes.

They have finally become cost-effective in cities of lower densities, and introduces a new parallel public transit system.

• You see nearest bike in app map.
• Enter your membership code into the bike's numeric pad, to instantly unlock bike.
  (in some cities, just tap bus fare card -- like their equivalent of Presto!)
• Do your 1-way bike trip.
• Finish by locking anywhere to any pole or plain bike rack using electronic U-bar.
• Done!

The solar+dynamo+battery powered GPS tracker (+3G/LTE) and nonstandard parts instantly discourages losses by bike theft. No full dock worry. Newer low-cost smartbike bike sharing systems now has capital cost per passenger & operational cost per passenger than a suburban city bus. Properly deployed, public transit bikes make excellent transit connectors to motorized public transit routes.

Some cities are now experimenting/reprogramming them to let you use your bus/subway transfer to also use these bikes, to do your "last mile connection".

This can beat waiting for a bus if the GO station (or subway station) is only a 10 minute bike ride away, especially if a nearby bike is ready to grab with bike stations less than 300 meters apart and instantly visible on an app map. One-way bike rides, park-and-forget, no wait, no maintenance, quicker unlock/lock (less fiddling), no full-docks worry (unlike BIXI), no weather/theft worry.

Lest not forget the condo dwellers, with the "spectacular condo kablooie" going on in the core parts of 416, and the inconvenience of pulling a bike from balcony or underground parking -- it's easier to use bikeshare. You just quickly grab a bikeshare bike next to the condo (In fact, for this reason, I used to have a BIXI membership when I was a condo dweller in downtown Toronto).

As time passes and technology improves, technology falls in cost, bike sharing systems are really truly here to stay, considering their excellent bang-for-buck public transit economics -- with newer systems costing less than passengers on a bus route but having more bike ridership than the said bus route. It should not be a replacement for buses/subways, but it is an excellent supplement, when properly deployed. Done well, 100% farebox recovery, they are cost-effective excellent public transit connectors.

 

[Napoleon]

By the way, don't get too excited to hop on these lanes just yet. I had to run an errand today near Adelaide and Church and was expecting smooth sailing. Zero work has been done on Adelaide west of Simcoe so far. In fact, it's worse than it usually is as there is construction blocking the right lane in many places and even the right and left lanes are blocked simultaneously in a stretch. Richmond has the bike lanes all chalked in, but drivers are definitely not acknowledging anything yet.

By the way, I noticed the planters that have been put in on Richmond approaching Spadina. They're a much nicer (and safer) separator than a flexi-post. I don't think any (sober) driver is going to be trying to drive these over.

 

[mdrejhon]

[Rebuttal Salvo #1]

sounds like a fad to me.

No trees and no bikes in Amsterdam, 1972.

Bikes were a fad in 1972.

Citzens blocked streets, the mayor was persuaded, and eventually the citizenry won out -- bike infrastructure grew and grew then. As you can see in this YouTube, this was way, way before 2008.

Although most cities are not nearly as activist as this, similar citizen pressures occured in some cities such as Minneapolis in the 1990s, and now they are ranked as one of the top 20 bikeable cities in the world -- an American city! And before 2008!

In some parts of 416 Toronto, we're already approaching (and in some cases, exceeding) Amsterdam dweller densities thanks to our condo boom. In this higher-density situation (even with good transit -- Amsterdam has more subways than Toronto), car ownership becomes more useless to condo dwellers due to frustration and the closer commuting distances.

So bikes were a fad in 1972.

Yes, yes, we ain't Amsterdam, but the denser parts of 416 can be a lot closer to Minneapolis. Fad? Nah.
Our new condos ain't going away.

[/Rebuttal Salvo #1]

 

[mdrejhon]

[Rebuttal Salvo #2]

sounds like a fad to me.

Condo cars are now collecting dust.

TheStar: Unused Toronto cars collecting dust in new Toronto condos:

The former auto factory worker now rides his bike from his condo.
"Being from Windsor, it’s hard to shake my attachment to cars: my mom worked at GM; an uncle at Ford; grandfather at Chrysler. Some friends still work the lines that are left. Cars mean more than just transportation."
​

Today's Toronto new condo dwellers (many with cars collecting dust) is demanding bike infrastructure expansion. Not nearly as much as Amsterdam, but with lack of ability to install downtown transit quickly, it is politically far easier and cheaper to install protected/safer bike infrastructure through downtown Toronto.

There is no way to widen streets downtown to push more cars through, so there is no way to speed up cars downtown core. And the condos aren't going to be demolished in 5 years from now.

As the condo boom continues, and with the bike being faster than streetcar, faster than taking car out of garage, and many areas not within access of a subway station (yet), there is huge demand for Toronto downtown biking if bike infrastructure became safer and easier. As evidenced, Sherbourne has become much more popular this year, especially with additional bike route connections (e.g. completed Queens Quay, etc).

With the condo boom, we're already approaching Amsterdam dweller densities in some parts of 416 Toronto already (far from fast rapid transit, too). As more protected bike infrastructure arrives, and Toronto connects still-disconnected segments of protected bike routes, usage will rocket even further (as seen years ago on College, and now more recently on the empty-but-now-busy-in-AM-peak Sherbourne bike lanes). It's really fast to bike from Bathhurst or Sherbourne to a downtown location. It's even still faster to bike downtown from Beaches and Liberty, than to catch the streetcar.

The old adage, if they build it, they will come, really rings true in our specific case, and we need to continue. Especially if another 10 years of condo boom continues here in Toronto, as it likely will (even with a temporary 1-to-2-year-pause caused by a theoretical 30% housing market correction), due to the very relatively high desirability of Toronto on a worldwide basis. I can see no way that cars use will be able to increase in the core, given the incredible frustrations trying to drive through downtown, and the lack of need for a downtown condo dweller to drive to work locally.

Especially with all the stoplights, and streetcars slowing cars, you can only push less thann ~1,000 cars per hour at rush hour in a downtown Toronto car lane (usually far slower than that), as evidenced by College:

(Credit: Cycle Toronto)
Efficiencies like this is happening to other bike routes through Toronto, as the disconnected segments finally get connected to each other. Even Sherbourne is now showing peak-hour bike ratios bigger than cars finally this year (ratio of road-surface-area versus vehicle count) despite fewer total bikes than cars.

What this means is more bikes-per-square-meter-of-lane occured than cars-per-square-meter-of-road. Obviously, lots more surface is allocated to cars. I'm talking of during rush hour, of course -- Even though there is more total cars than bikes, Sherbourne is now currently moving more grand total people than before the lanes were built, at least during a non-wintertime rush hour!

Even freeways only push ~2000 cars per car lane per hour (less than 2 second tailgating, there are only 3600 seconds in one hour), show how inefficient that car lanes are in a very-highly-densified part of Toronto. There just ain't enough space for cars; so now we have to push more people through downtown by adding bike infrastructure. Condos make this unavoidable. DRL completion isn't coming for more than a decade. And we won't even have as many subways as bike-happy Amsterdam. We don't have to be Amsterdam, but, we can be far better than today. See?

And this is only going to improve because of the local condo boom that is not currently abating.

As a car driver, I know how frustrated I am trying to drive downtown Toronto during rush hour. I just don't bother anymore. It's just a lot more appealing to us the subway, streetcar or bike depending on weather and my current location. Once city density reaches a certain point, the car just isn't practical anymore during rush hour. I even see business suits ($100K salaries) pull a BIXI in the Toronto Financial District nowadays, to get to a satellite office at Bloor, as one example -- despite the overcrowded subway being available. It's not just for the poor anymore. A famous mayor quote; "A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation." We need bike/transit infrastructure worthy of the whole spectrum of society.

Yes, yes, we ain't Amsterdam, but the denser parts of 416 can be a lot closer to Minneapolis. Fad? Nah.
Our new condos ain't going away.

[/Rebuttal Salvo #2]