General cycling issues (Is Toronto bike friendly?)

[PinkLucy]

I guess we'll find out when the census numbers are released

 

[salsa]

This morning I biked on the Beltline trail which I haven't done in a while. The city made some interesting improvements recently.


Oriole Parkway

Now there's a fenced island in the middle of the road that makes it easier to cross the street.

Avenue Road

Here there's a brand new signalized crossing for pedestrians and cyclists. The bike signal even has bicycle shaped lights. I wonder why they didn't install this at Oriole Parkway as well?

Bathurst Street

Unfortunately nothing has changed at Bathurst Street, not even a curb cut. This is a big problem. There are also no curb cuts on any of the cross streets between Bathurst and Caledonia.

Entrance at Russell Hill Road

And finally, I saw this new drinking fountain that I haven't seen before which includes a faucet near the ground for dogs to drink from. I think this is brilliant, especially given the high number of dog walkers that use the Beltline.

 

[steveintoronto]

I wonder why they didn't install this at Oriole Parkway as well?

If there wasn't pedestrian crossing lights, then that might explain it. Great pics, btw!

which includes a faucet near the ground for dogs to drink from.

All well and good, but how's the dog supposed to reach the button and drink at the same time?...OH! That's what the top one is for! Never mind...lol

It's been a while since I've done the Belt Line. On Saturday I did GO to Rouge Hill Station, and then the Bluff Path west, up the Doris McCarthy Trail to Bellamy, and then up to Eglinton GO Station, just a short trip really....but then curiosity got the better of me, I love tying together segments to make a longer and better trip, so took the path from Eglinton GO to Brimley, found a track through the continuation of that green corridor to get me almost to St Clair and Midland, past the Scarborough station along St Clair until Kennedy, through the cemetery until Birchmount, through St Clair park to almost Warden, down the Gus Harris Trail to almost Pharmacy, laneway through Crescent Town to Vic Park, up to the beginning of the Taylor Creek Park Trail, onto the Don Valley and Bob's your cycling uncle across town...

There's obviously some on-street, but the vast majority is trail. Real happy with myself, albeit repeated it Sunday to fine tune it and maximize the green running.

Any other suggestions most welcome! The trick is to get across Toronto with maximum trail in green areas. A lot of the trick is in how the stretches are strung together. Maximum points for avoiding major roads. The older I get, the less I want to fight with traffic, car and other cyclists like on the Queen's Quay stretch. On the back trails, cyclists are far better behaved, and you can make good time without putting yourself or them and pedestrians at risk. And we're all happier!

Suggestions for more routes most welcome!

 

[salsa]

If there wasn't pedestrian crossing lights, then that might explain it. Great pics, btw!

Of course there are no lights at Oriole Parkway, because the city opted for an island instead of a signalized intersection. I'm just wondering why they chose not to have a traffic light here even though they installed one on Avenue Road.

 

[Fred.S]

Are those the first bicycle-shaped traffic signals in Toronto? Haven't seen them anywhere else, but I'm glad we're using them now. Although I find it unnecessarily redundant now to have the words "Bicycle Signal". It also seems unnecessary having two signals. I don't know why every transit and bike signal has to be doubled, but pedestrian signals are fine being a single unit.

 

[k10ery]

k10ery, as I understand it, Toronto Police doesn't track collisions that do not involve motor vehicles. That doesn't lead to the conclusion that cyclist/pedestrian collisions are "rare" or that we should not worry about them. Until recently, police also didn't track dooring incidents - that didn't mean such incidents were not regularly occurring. And while fatalities (I assume) are rare from doorings, injuries are not.

As I stated, there is no evidence that pedestrian-cycling injury collisions are frequent. Let anyone who thinks so provide evidence. It is simply false to say "we all know this is a serious problem". We don't know that. All the evidence we have suggests it is NOT a serious problem.

"The car is a far greater threat to all of us - let's spend our time thinking about that instead."

I don't understand this logic. ... The safety of all road users is paramount - there is no need for us to pick and choose.

Yes, we should all work for greater safety in our own lives and behaviour. But, no, when it comes to discussing policy there is only so much money, time and attention. There IS a need to pick and choose.

And we should choose to focus on cars. Over the past 10 years while 2 pedestrians have been killed by cyclists, another 400+ have been killed by car crashes. (And a couple of thousand more by air pollution caused by cars. But that's another matter.)

Cyclists are not an important threat to safety. If we spend so much time talking about this very small rare problem, we give people the wrong idea about the risks involved.

Put it another way. Would you agree that texting by motorists is a more important safety problem in Toronto right now? ("We all know this but the media won't report it." ) Where is the UT thread dedicated to solving that problem? Where are the proposals to force the telcos to change their technology to deal with it?

 

[steveintoronto]

Cyclists are not an important threat to safety.

I beg to differ, and I'm an avid cyclist myself. They put me in danger, let alone pedestrians.

Would you agree that texting by motorists is a more important safety problem in Toronto right now?

I see cyclists texting, no hands, not looking. Tell me that isn't dangerous.

 

[Skeezix]

As I stated, there is no evidence that pedestrian-cycling injury collisions are frequent. Let anyone who thinks so provide evidence. It is simply false to say "we all know this is a serious problem". We don't know that. All the evidence we have suggests it is NOT a serious problem.

Where is the evidence we have that suggests that this is not a serious problem?

Yes, we should all work for greater safety in our own lives and behaviour. But, no, when it comes to discussing policy there is only so much money, time and attention. There IS a need to pick and choose.

This. Exactly this. This is one of the major impediments to cycling gaining more traction and support in this city. The mere suggestion that cyclists need to respect pedestrian safety at pedestrian crossings and there are people whose response effectively amounts to "Not a problem. Don't care. F*ck pedestrians. No time or energy for pedestrians to be safe. Sorry."

As I said above, "cars cause way more damage" is certainly true, but is not a legitimate reason for cyclists to ignore pedestrian safety.

We spend so much time and energy explaining that cyclists are citizens and taxpayers too, and that they are as entitled to occupy the road and to commute safely as any motorist. Then, somehow, we get people who endorse that position but then bizarrely seem to think that pedestrians are not entitled to that same safety.

Respect is not a pie. Respecting pedestrians and their infrastructure does not mean that by necessity there is less respect for cyclists (the whole "his pie slice is bigger, so mine has to be smaller" fallacy). There is absolutely no need to pick and choose who gets to have a safe commute and who doesn't.

And we should choose to focus on cars. Over the past 10 years while 2 pedestrians have been killed by cyclists,

You're just making up stats now? And who said fatalities were the issue? The issue is pedestrians being able to cross the street safely, without injury or threat of injury from other road users who refuse to pay heed to pedestrian crossings.

another 400+ have been killed by car crashes. (And a couple of thousand more by air pollution caused by cars. But that's another matter.)

Yes, it's horrendous. That doesn't in any way excuse injuries or threat of injuries to pedestrians. Not sure you're making the point that you think you are.

Cyclists are not an important threat to safety. If we spend so much time talking about this very small rare problem, we give people the wrong idea about the risks involved.

To someone who risks injury crossing the street because it's a toss up whether a cyclist can be bothered following the rules of the road to stop, yes that's an important threat. And, yes, we should be telling people that it is a risk - people are not stupid, talking about how cyclists can put pedestrians at risk by failing to pay attention to crossings will not undermine efforts to increase safety for cyclists vis-a-vis cars. Education about law and respect are a good way to get cyclists to give pedestrians the same respect that cyclists deserve themselves (and vice versa - pedestrians stepping blindly into bike lanes can put cyclists at risk). That's not to say that cyclists are by any means the only ones needing education about respect and the rules of the road, or even the ones most in need.

Put it another way. Would you agree that texting by motorists is a more important safety problem in Toronto right now? ("We all know this but the media won't report it." ) Where is the UT thread dedicated to solving that problem? Where are the proposals to force the telcos to change their technology to deal with it?

You seem to have gone off on a tangent. I dunno, start a thread about telcos if you want, as someone did here with this cycling thread. My point is that cyclists need to adhere to the rules about pedestrian crossings, and that if they are going to use the so-called Idaho Stop (which I support) they need to adopt all aspects of it (i.e. yielding when someone else has the right of way).

 

[Filip]

I beg to differ, and I'm an avid cyclist myself. They put me in danger, let alone pedestrians.
I see cyclists texting, no hands, not looking. Tell me that isn't dangerous.

I see cyclists eating and drinking with both hands occupied. However, at the end of the day, they're more likely to hurt themselves than others.

I've been almost clipped by a bike at Bathurst/Queen when he made a sharp right turn onto Queen while the pedestrian light was green for us to cross Bathurst. He clipped my briefcase, but then managed to hit some guy in the face and broke his tooth. Of course he swears at us and just bikes away.

The narrow path along the lake at Marine Parade is a common conflict point. The community thankfully managed to get cops to ticket high speed cyclists who don't yield to pedestrians. They're out there almost every beautiful weekend day ticketing cyclists. This was spurred because a dog was killed 2 years ago by someone biking over 30km/h.

It's very simple. From my outsider's perspective, I see cyclists demanding the same set of 'privileges' as cars (use of lanes, no passing in the same lane, etc), but refuse to a) yield to buses like vehicles are supposed to b) bike on the road when there's obstacles downtown (that's my favourite - bus in the way? I'll just go onto the sidewalk and start terrorizing pedestrians) or c) ignore stop signs or red lights.

What would the cycling lobby say about cars doing the above? They'd call for bloody murder.

 

[ShonTron]

It's so easy to get off the Waterfront Trail and take Marine Parade Drive and Lake Shore Boulevard into Mimico and on to Port Credit. I don't know why the speed demons just don't do this.

But @Filip, you're falling into the same trap as Wormington et al. when you start to say this. You're generalizing, and you're coming up with the most extreme cases. Some cyclists are asshats. I've been clipped by a Foodora courier on the sidewalk. I curse at cyclists speeding through reds while I'm stopped at a light. But this is isn't helpful.

It's very simple. From my outsider's perspective, I see cyclists demanding the same set of 'privileges' as cars (use of lanes, no passing in the same lane, etc), but refuse to a) yield to buses like vehicles are supposed to b) bike on the road when there's obstacles downtown (that's my favourite - bus in the way? I'll just go onto the sidewalk and start terrorizing pedestrians) or c) ignore stop signs or red lights.

 

[the lemur]

I beg to differ, and I'm an avid cyclist myself. They put me in danger, let alone pedestrians.
I see cyclists texting, no hands, not looking. Tell me that isn't dangerous.

It is dangerous, but it's harder to do without falling over than driving and texting, which is much more common. I see an incredible number of drivers pick up their phones while waiting at lights and continue texting as they move off.

 

[the lemur]

Are those the first bicycle-shaped traffic signals in Toronto? Haven't seen them anywhere else, but I'm glad we're using them now. Although I find it unnecessarily redundant now to have the words "Bicycle Signal". It also seems unnecessary having two signals. I don't know why every transit and bike signal has to be doubled, but pedestrian signals are fine being a single unit.

There are ones across Bayview at the Brick Works and also at Queen's Park Crescent West at Hoskin. In the latter case, the bike signal is distinct from the pedestrian and main traffic signals, since cars make the southbound turn first. In other situations, such as where bike trails in hydro corridors cross roads in Scarborough, the bike signal is distinct because the bike paths and pedestrian crossings connect with different parts of the sidewalk opposite.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Why do they make the Queen's Quay path look like a bike path, with bike signals, bike markings on the ground, and then wonder why bikes think it's exclusively for them? And, IMO, it should be. There's a sidewalk there for pedestrians. It's even more frustrating in the Beach(es) where there's a boardwalk path right beside the bike path, and still people push strollers, walk or run on the bike path.

 

[Filip]

It's so easy to get off the Waterfront Trail and take Marine Parade Drive and Lake Shore Boulevard into Mimico and on to Port Credit. I don't know why the speed demons just don't do this.

But @Filip, you're falling into the same trap as Wormington et al. when you start to say this. You're generalizing, and you're coming up with the most extreme cases. Some cyclists are asshats. I've been clipped by a Foodora courier on the sidewalk. I curse at cyclists speeding through reds while I'm stopped at a light. But this is isn't helpful.

Drivers are always demonized on this website (especially in this thread) yet I don't think I've ever had to dodge cars going through red lights or coming down the sidewalk at 30km/h when I'm on it.

Respect for cyclists is earned, and most don't respect them right now.

 

[Skeezix]

Respect for cyclists is earned, and most don't respect them right now.

I'm not sure that's true. I agree with @ShonTron when he says "some cyclists are asshats". To add to that, some motorists are asshats, as are some pedestrians.

Most cyclists simply want to get from A to B safely.