Cycling infrastructure (Separated bike lanes)

[MisterF]

I agree that equating ownership w/use is problematic/potentially misleading.

However, I think there's a need to go further. People's impressions/assumptions both about Toronto, but also many other places is simply wrong.

Lets take a look at Modal Share in Rome, Italy (data 2019)

View attachment 596441

As you can see Rome is rather car dependent.

Indeed, when one compares to Toronto:

View attachment 596442

You'll see that Toronto has slightly higher rail uptake, and substantially higher cycling uptake than Rome, while we do walk less here, and drive just a bit more.

****

Lets throw in two more just to mess with folks, here's our oft compared peer in North America, Chicago:

View attachment 596443

Finally, here''s Stockholm, Sweden:

View attachment 596444




I think what stands out among the 4 cities I selected is that Toronto is doing remarkably well in transit and cycling uptake, with the most pronounced shortcoming in respect of sustainability being walking.

Bonus, here's Montreal:

View attachment 596445

All Data above from:

C40 Knowledge Community

www.c40knowledgehub.org

This actually lines up pretty well with my experience of Rome. While it has a good regional rail network the metro is underdeveloped. It has virtually no cycling infrastructure, narrow sidewalks in a lot of places, and cars are squeezed into every spare inch of space.

 

[Northern Light]

This actually lines up pretty well with my experience of Rome. While it has a good regional rail network the metro is underdeveloped. It has virtually no cycling infrastructure, narrow sidewalks in a lot of places, and cars are squeezed into every spare inch of space.

I haven't been to Rome in over 20 years now. Trevi Fountain aside, it didn't give me the best impressions overall when I was there. Back then, they only had the A and B lines, their metro has enlarged a fair bit since then. But back then, in a hot Roman summer, the rollingstock and stations had no a/c. The smell was not good, there were notices everywhere about pick pockets.

While there is a wealth of history in Rome and some lovely landmarks, at the time, the City had a derth of trees and parks, and the larger roads were not only car oriented and wide, they were quite chaotic with surprisingly few traffic controls.

 

[evandyk]

I've been to Rome four times now between 2006 and 2019 (when I spent a month there while on paternity leave), and it's getting a lot better in terms of cars/scooters. They still dominate too much, but the chaos is less. But in a month, we only took the subway a handful of times because it didn't have very good coverage of the places we wanted to go. There was a ton of work being done on their new subway line at the time, and it seems that it's still going on. Not sure when that's planned to open.

Work on new Rome subway line under the Colosseum and Forum enters crucial phase

A long-delayed and complex project to bring a subway line under ancient Roman ruins and through Rome’s historic center has entered a crucial phase.

apnews.com

There's not much to be done about the narrow sidewalks (which make getting around with a stroller and a six month old baby quite a challenge!) but there's a large network of streets right in the core that are effectively closed to cars.

There is definitely a shortage of trees and parks. For me, the wealth of squares, both large and tiny, and fountains, makes up for that. but that's obviously personal.

 

[dimonpc]

New bike lane on University Ave south of College is almost perfect in my opinion:

It's a great balance between cars and cyclist. Drivers still have 2 lanes and parking along the road. Cyclist get a super wide bike lane with nice green separation from cars. Concrete barriers are also wide enough if someone open a car door it won't hit a cyclist.

 

[Towered]

New bike lane on University Ave south of College is almost perfect in my opinion:

It's a great balance between cars and cyclist. Drivers still have 2 lanes and parking along the road. Cyclist get a super wide bike lane with nice green separation from cars. Concrete barriers are also wide enough if someone open a car door it won't hit a cyclist.

Is there a plan to do something similar on the east side?

 

[Northern Light]

Is there a plan to do something similar on the east side?

Yes.

Hopefully next year.

 

[Towered]

I've been to Rome four times now between 2006 and 2019 (when I spent a month there while on paternity leave), and it's getting a lot better in terms of cars/scooters. They still dominate too much, but the chaos is less. But in a month, we only took the subway a handful of times because it didn't have very good coverage of the places we wanted to go. There was a ton of work being done on their new subway line at the time, and it seems that it's still going on. Not sure when that's planned to open.

Work on new Rome subway line under the Colosseum and Forum enters crucial phase

A long-delayed and complex project to bring a subway line under ancient Roman ruins and through Rome’s historic center has entered a crucial phase.

apnews.com

There's not much to be done about the narrow sidewalks (which make getting around with a stroller and a six month old baby quite a challenge!) but there's a large network of streets right in the core that are effectively closed to cars.

There is definitely a shortage of trees and parks. For me, the wealth of squares, both large and tiny, and fountains, makes up for that. but that's obviously personal.

Historic squares and epic fountains are great and all, but their versatility is limited in that they don't lend themselves to interactive physical leisure activities the way parks do, or provide children with anything to do.

 

[Towered]

Yes.

Hopefully next year.

Wonderful news since that's the side I work on, so I want the environment outside our office to be beautiful!

 

[evandyk]

Historic squares and epic fountains are great and all, but their versatility is limited in that they don't lend themselves to interactive physical leisure activities the way parks do, or provide children with anything to do.

True, though Rome does get a lot greener the moment you leave the immediate historic/tourist centre. There are large green areas around that.

 

[UntitledCyclist]

In a suburb like you linked or wide lane area, I think it’s okay. There’s a myth that running on asphalt is easier on the knees than concrete (because technically asphalt is “softer”), so sometimes that's an influence. Sidewalks can be in worse shape than the shoulder of a road where bike lanes tend to be; the road usually doesn’t have potential tripping risks every few feet like a sidewalk might with uneven “slabs”. Years ago I ran with a group in Whitby and when in subdivisions we were always on the road, but there were few cars and nearly 0 cyclists, so I get it. Living in Toronto's west end, I find it rare to see anyone running in a bike lane, let alone on the road. If anything, I see more people cycling on the sidewalk

It's funny at best, annoying or dangerous at worst when runners take to a street or bike lane for this reason. This belief seems widespread if not universal among joggers, even though it seems incredibly unlikely to me, given the miniscule weight of a human compared to the forces involved in distending any type of pavement, as well as the much softer materials (shoe rubber, ligaments, bone) involved in human biophysics. I remember searching in vain for something that clearly debunked it a while ago. There is stuff like this, but it's not terribly well presented.

Either it's just not deemed important enough to investigate or research, or enough runners believe it and have amassed "anecdotal evidence" that asphalt is better. The internet is full of "runner's site" articles that make uninformed claims because "asphalt is softer" which might be true technically but doesn't mean it has any true impact on a runner's body (or a cyclist's for that matter!)

 

[PL1]

Either it's just not deemed important enough to investigate or research, or enough runners believe it and have amassed "anecdotal evidence" that asphalt is better. The internet is full of "runner's site" articles that make uninformed claims because "asphalt is softer" which might be true technically but doesn't mean it has any true impact on a runner's body (or a cyclist's for that matter!)

Anecdote time: the most beaten up my legs have ever felt after a marathon (I've done 20-ish races) was in Chicago, where the streets are mostly concrete. All the others have been mostly asphalt. That said, I don't notice any difference for lower effort training runs (which can be 35+ km). And I've only done the Chicago Marathon one time, so take this with a large grain of salt. Roads can be very rounded to allow drainage, which I find really uncomfortable to run on.

 

[just east of the creek]

I haven't been to Rome in over 20 years now. Trevi Fountain aside, it didn't give me the best impressions overall when I was there. Back then, they only had the A and B lines, their metro has enlarged a fair bit since then. But back then, in a hot Roman summer, the rollingstock and stations had no a/c. The smell was not good, there were notices everywhere about pick pockets.

While there is a wealth of history in Rome and some lovely landmarks, at the time, the City had a derth of trees and parks, and the larger roads were not only car oriented and wide, they were quite chaotic with surprisingly few traffic controls.

That is Rome! Forget bicycles, it is a city for your Vespa or Piaggio, and so much fun.

 

[Undead]

New bike lane on University Ave south of College is almost perfect in my opinion:

It's a great balance between cars and cyclist. Drivers still have 2 lanes and parking along the road. Cyclist get a super wide bike lane with nice green separation from cars. Concrete barriers are also wide enough if someone open a car door it won't hit a cyclist.

Get rid of the parking and plant more trees, dammit.

 

[just east of the creek]

I had a meeting at a central Eglinton address, so I thought I would carry out my semi-annual west to east Eglinton tour, then down the DV and west again, across the G until I was far enough west to turn north again to where the apples are ready to pick (hint, hint). Just to see what the surface looked like. One day I may be able to make the circumnavigation by transit, and not including a bus that does not travel on a separated BRT. That will be fun.

Anyway, my comment is about street parking on a major arterial like E.

A) I don’t get it. Why are we sacrificing valuable pedestrian space, separated bike lane space and an extra possible lane or two of traffic flow for the very questionable benefits of on street parking. Yes there may be a need for commercial parking for the Hostess Chip Truck or the Beer Store delivery, and with planning, I think those accommodations can be made. But for Joe Q Public? I cannot believe for more then one nano second, that on street parking is a make or break item to a thriving public commercial and neighborhood area. I would rather have the extra personalized space for restaurants, outdoor street selling, fruit markets etc etc. and foster a lively and functioning urban space and neighbourhood. Especially where setbacks are minimal. Green P can occur underground, behind, around the corner and zoned into redevelopement as it happens.

B) Eglinton Improvements.Well I did not need the F450 for this trip, the ride was generally smoother in areas previously hit hard by surface construction, but there is a ways to go. I understand these are only ‘interim’ improvements and more is to come. I hope and trust ( and I know someone will correct me) that the improvements to the west end of E follow the patterns established by the completed improvements extending westwards from Yonge for seperated bike lanes. If we are going to have on street parking separating active bike lanes and moving traffic, then paint only does not work. A mid morning commute would have kept our favourite traffic officer (Erin?) busy every block where white lines of paint were delineating permitted activities.

 

[Northern Light]

A) I don’t get it. Why are we sacrificing valuable pedestrian space, separated bike lane space and an extra possible lane or two of traffic flow for the very questionable benefits of on street parking. Yes there may be a need for commercial parking for the Hostess Chip Truck or the Beer Store delivery, and with planning, I think those accommodations can be made. But for Joe Q Public? I cannot believe for more then one nano second, that on street parking is a make or break item to a thriving public commercial and neighborhood area. I would rather have the extra personalized space for restaurants, outdoor street selling, fruit markets etc etc. and foster a lively and functioning urban space and neighbourhood. Especially where setbacks are minimal. Green P can occur underground, behind, around the corner and zoned into redevelopment as it happens.

Excellent comment and I agree entirely. Some loading zones yes, but on-street parking 'no'. That said, parking is required for many types of businesses, and if its shifted off of a main road (as it should), you need off-street underground parking, and/or paid parking on the side streets within 200M of the main road/shopping district. This, by the way, is perfectly do-able, but it is not yet City policy, and that's a problem.

A Parking Strategy covering just this issue was due back this fall, but so far as I can figure hasn't even started.....

I understand these are only ‘interim’ improvements and more is to come. I hope and trust ( and I know someone will correct me) that the improvements to the west end of E follow the patterns established by the completed improvements extending westwards from Yonge for seperated bike lanes.

In general, yes, but the top tier version will await road reconstruction, which for some portions of Eglinton is many years in the offing.

Also, the section east of Yonge, north side, is set to get a larger sidewalk with new buildings set back further to create a park-like setting for few blocks along that segment.