Cycling infrastructure (Separated bike lanes)

[Fred.S]

Dave Meslin photo shopped a version of what it could look on Richmond except the lane would be two way
http://meslin.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/richmond_adelaide/

So probably more like Montreal's De Maisonneuve bike path, which I found was an awesome ride...

 

[Torontovibe]

Now if they could put planters with some nice plants or trees along the curb, that would be even better. The curb has to be wide enough to protect cyclists from car doors, suddenly opening.

 

[Fred.S]

Now if they could put planters with some nice plants or trees along the curb, that would be even better. The curb has to be wide enough to protect cyclists from car doors, suddenly opening.

True, in my photo above the curb should be wide enough. Although most drivers won't stop on that side as it's a no stopping zone, and it feels like the fast lane beside a median.

 

[k10ery]

New on road bike lanes aren't happening during the Ford administration. The official policy statement is "my heart bleeds when a cyclist gets hit but in the end it is their own damned fault" or something like that. The only new bike lanes we will get are off road and if we can get Ford to fund them that will still be a success. There were a number of off road bike routes planned along creeks and hydro corridors which need funding.

You'd think, wouldn't you? But the 2011 capital plan says this:

Service Improvements
• Funding in the total amount of $86.506 million has been allocated to complete approximately 80km of off-street bicycle paths (50 km during the first five years), 160 km of on-street signed routes (100 km during the first five years) and 340 km of bicycle lanes (120 km during the first five years).

Maybe His Honour did not proofread that far into the document though...

 

[reaperexpress]

I don't understand this urge for a "connected network" of bicycle lanes. As a cyclist in York Region, I can certainly say first hand that bicycles can ride safely and comfortably on streets without any cycling facilities. It's unreasonable to expect that all streets have bike lanes, so most trips inevitably have some mixed traffic portions anyway. Cyclists go from everywhere to just about everywhere else, and I think lanes should be focused where there is high cycling demand (such as Queens Quay for example) or where road layout is unsafe or unpleasant for cyclists (such as long bridges, underpasses or arterial roads).

Bike paths are also useful for adding shortcuts, a function they fulfill perfectly even when not connected to any other bike facilities. Thanks to mixed-use trails, my commute is 1.4km shorter by bicycle than it is by car.

That said I do understand the need to fill missing gaps in bike paths because it is often awkward to transition between path and street riding.

So in short, a lack of "network connectivity" isn't really an argument against building paths and lanes because cyclists already cycle in mixed traffic anyway, and will benefit from bike lanes even if they don't connect to any other ones.

 

[Fred.S]

I don't understand this urge for a "connected network" of bicycle lanes. As a cyclist in York Region, I can certainly say first hand that bicycles can ride safely and comfortably on streets without any cycling facilities.

Agreed. For me personally, I never normally care whether there's a bike lane or not. I know a lot of cyclists won't agree with me, but I find drivers in Toronto (and the GTA) are pretty good to cyclists as long as they follow the rules of the road and don't weave in and out of cars unpredictably.

The only time bike lanes come in handy to me is when traffic is gridlocked and I can easily zoom past traffic without trying squeeze between cars and the curb.

However, cycling has increased since bike lanes have been installed. I don't know if it's directly corrolated, but so long as they're encouraging cycling, I'm all for bike lanes. I also think that they should concentrate bike lanes where there the demand is (most of downtown) instead of trying to shoehorn them in in random places.

 

[junctionist]

I don't understand this urge for a "connected network" of bicycle lanes. As a cyclist in York Region, I can certainly say first hand that bicycles can ride safely and comfortably on streets without any cycling facilities. It's unreasonable to expect that all streets have bike lanes, so most trips inevitably have some mixed traffic portions anyway. Cyclists go from everywhere to just about everywhere else, and I think lanes should be focused where there is high cycling demand (such as Queens Quay for example) or where road layout is unsafe or unpleasant for cyclists (such as long bridges, underpasses or arterial roads).

Bike paths are also useful for adding shortcuts, a function they fulfill perfectly even when not connected to any other bike facilities. Thanks to mixed-use trails, my commute is 1.4km shorter by bicycle than it is by car.

That said I do understand the need to fill missing gaps in bike paths because it is often awkward to transition between path and street riding.

So in short, a lack of "network connectivity" isn't really an argument against building paths and lanes because cyclists already cycle in mixed traffic anyway, and will benefit from bike lanes even if they don't connect to any other ones.

The concern is to create the best possible infrastructure for cyclists, not just isolated bike lanes that will have "some" benefit for a few cyclists in one particular area. The notion that bike lanes should be focused on areas with high demand and unsafe conditions reinforces the need for a network with many connected routes. Such a network realizes that notion and organizes the improvements in a way that serves more people and serves those people with safe conditions for a greater number of possible trips by bike.

Some bicycle infrastructure improvements do seem like shallow "feel good measures" like sharrows or bike lanes on side streets, justified only by the need for a network. But this sort of network might be shallow and not expansive of the number of places safely reachable by bike. For all the design efforts and community consultations, it may achieve little. A proper network in Toronto would greatly expand the possible number of places that can be safely and conveniently reached by bicycle year round.

I think the network is currently lacking in connections to York University, and it makes the notion of travelling there by bike seem unsafe from many parts of the city, even if there's a few paths and bike lanes here and there. If a new path gets built along some side streets, there's nothing wrong with that, though it may give a false sense of achievement to local residents, politicians, and planners. Looking at the cycling map, there isn't a single major bike lane leading to York U from any direction, though you'd think a major regional destination would have something substantial.

 

[reaperexpress]

The only time bike lanes come in handy to me is when traffic is gridlocked and I can easily zoom past traffic without trying squeeze between cars and the curb.

However, cycling has increased since bike lanes have been installed. I don't know if it's directly corrolated, but so long as they're encouraging cycling, I'm all for bike lanes. I also think that they should concentrate bike lanes where there the demand is (most of downtown) instead of trying to shoehorn them in in random places.

I agree. Bike lanes are awesome when traffic comes to a stop. If traffic stops on a street without bike lanes and I want to obey the rules of the road, there is little I can do, other than sit and wait.

Bike lanes were recently added onto Dufferin street between Steeles and Hwy 7. Although they are not connected to any other lanes, and are not in an area with high bike traffic, their impact has only been positive. The number of cyclists I see going past me as I wait for the bus has gone up significantly since they went in, presumably because they provide commuters with a way to cycle quickly without cycling irresponsibly. I find them useful, and use them quite frequently. For one thing, they go from my house to Canadian Tire.

They might look "random" on a map, but the road was being widened anyway, so why not put them in? It probably made no difference in the cost of the project.

The concern is to create the best possible infrastructure for cyclists, not just isolated bike lanes that will have "some" benefit for a few cyclists in one particular area. The notion that bike lanes should be focused on areas with high demand and unsafe conditions reinforces the need for a network with many connected routes. Such a network realizes that notion and organizes the improvements in a way that serves more people and serves those people with safe conditions for a greater number of possible trips by bike.

"Some" benefit is better than no benefit at all. It's not like bike lanes are expensive or anything.

Some bicycle infrastructure improvements do seem like shallow "feel good measures" like sharrows or bike lanes on side streets, justified only by the need for a network. But this sort of network might be shallow and not expansive of the number of places safely reachable by bike. For all the design efforts and community consultations, it may achieve little. A proper network in Toronto would greatly expand the possible number of places that can be safely and conveniently reached by bicycle year round.

It's probably true that some improvements are just "feel good measures", but if they improve the number of cyclists, there's no harm in them, as long as they don't hinder the construction of more important cycling projects.

 

[typezed]

Random implementation of bike lanes, where they were add-ons to streetscape improvements and subject to the meddling, either advocacy or vetoing, of the local councillour, probably added fuel to the war on cars rhetoric. Lanes on roads like Birchmount, which didn't connect to much besides the Warden Woods trail and was claimed to be infrequently used, were often cited as tactics to discourage driving. Lanes like Jarvis, Eastern, and the proposed ones on University were popping up close to already established lanes. The existing spotty network requires cyclists to at some point encounter tight, heavy traffic, making them much less useful for cyclists who lack confidence. Fewer, better (protected and connected, like Minnan-Wong's proposal) lanes would allow a wider range of cyclists to travel safely through the city, meaning more people would know active cyclists and would perhaps be more open to seeing the utility of investment in transportation options.

 

[reaperexpress]

Random implementation of bike lanes, where they were add-ons to streetscape improvements and subject to the meddling, either advocacy or vetoing, of the local councillour, probably added fuel to the war on cars rhetoric.

So? Anything anyone ever does will inevitably piss someone off.

Lanes on roads like Birchmount, which didn't connect to much besides the Warden Woods trail and was claimed to be infrequently used, were often cited as tactics to discourage driving. Lanes like Jarvis, Eastern, and the proposed ones on University were popping up close to already established lanes.

Are you implying that cyclists only exist on bike lanes and trails? Because that is certainly not the case.

Why should we wait for the network to spread to a certain location before making any improvements to cycling infrastructure? When they widened Dufferin street near my house, would you rather they had not put in bike lanes because they wouldn't connect to other existing lanes?

The existing spotty network requires cyclists to at some point encounter tight, heavy traffic, making them much less useful for cyclists who lack confidence. Fewer, better (protected and connected, like Minnan-Wong's proposal) lanes would allow a wider range of cyclists to travel safely through the city, meaning more people would know active cyclists and would perhaps be more open to seeing the utility of investment in transportation options.

Cyclists may be able to safely travel through the city but what do they do when they want to go somewhere not on part of the "bicycle network"? Drive their car?
My point is that we already have a bicycle network. It's called roads. There are obviously problems with it, since it can definitely be dangerous and hostile to cyclists at times. These can be addressed with, among other things, bike lanes. So let's put them where they are warrented, not just where they look good on a map.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I tend toward reaperexpress' side of the argument here. There already exists a network of routes for cyclists - it's our existing grid of streets. What bike lanes, protected or otherwise, do is improve safety in places where cycling might be treacherous.

 

[k10ery]

I think the network is currently lacking in connections to York University, and it makes the notion of travelling there by bike seem unsafe from many parts of the city, even if there's a few paths and bike lanes here and there. If a new path gets built along some side streets, there's nothing wrong with that, though it may give a false sense of achievement to local residents, politicians, and planners. Looking at the cycling map, there isn't a single major bike lane leading to York U from any direction, though you'd think a major regional destination would have something substantial.

Good point. The situation at York will presumably get better with the Finch corridor trail now under construction.

One problem with our disjointed network is that when I come to the end of a lane in an unfamiliar part of the city I often can't tell which way to go for a safe route to my destination. Think of where the Pharmacy lane ends at Danforth. Where extending the lane is hard, more share route signage would help. Dave Meslin has recently suggested this I think.

 

[spider]

A trip to Toronto General Hospital yesterday, in part on Gerrard and Jarvis Streets, revealed very very few cyclists on the road but lots of bikes locked up on the sidewalks. My first impression was that the bike riders had arrived at their destinations and had locked up their bikes but then I noticed that the vast majority of these bikes had obviously been locked up before the latest layer of snow arrived a couple of days ago. Is it customary to ride to work or school in the morning and just leave your bike locked up if it snows during the day?

 

[GraphicMatt]

Sometimes. Also people live on Jarvis Street or nearby.

It's definitely not a great week for cycling, though - first bad one we've had this season.

 

[Eug]

Ford wants to get rid of the Jarvis bike lanes now. I never quite agreed with the Jarvis bike lanes in the first place (even as a rider that used to ride up Jarvis), buy it seems a bit odd to do this now... unless they can get those separated bike lanes in place sooner rather than later.