There is this little bit:
Joe is right.
I'm very pro-bike lane and lobbied for the full lanes on Simcoe and Peter.
This area is now well served by N-S lanes except on the largest roads (Spadina and Uni)
It's not as if bikes will be banned from John either.
The new configuration results in a narrower footprint for cars, lighter/slower traffic and improved aesthetics.
It simply isn't being configured as a bike highway (or one for cars) but rather as almost Woonerf life space that prioritizes pedestrians to great degree while not excluding other traffic.
I think it's a real shame that people in the cycling community are wasting time giving Joe and this project a hard time, really a not seeing the forest for the trees kinda situation.
Their resources would be better spent on enhancing other east-west options, including Bloor east of Avenue; and then possibly reviving the notion of a protected bike lane for Uni (from Adelaide north, and extending up Avenue to Oriole Parkway) .
I don't disagree, however I still find the logic infuriating. That the street will be closed for events sometimes, therefore we shouldn't have bike lanes for the 95% of the time when it's not closed. Should we also give up on bike lanes on Yonge Street under that same thinking?
I don't find that to be the primary logic behind it. The primary logic is that the right-of-way is being maximized for pedestrians, with one vehicular traffic lane becoming the leftover space for vehicles and other active transportation (cycling). Giving space (2-3m) to cyclists would take that away from the focus of the redesign: space for people that are not using the street as a thoroughfare, but as a destination.
Again, like @Northern Light said, forest for the trees. But the city and Cressy are letting the cycling community peg them on this and lose the message.
Yes, as that is the current thinking of the BIA and city, at least for the portion of Yonge between Gerrard and Queen.
Oh god no. Yonge is one of the last missing links in the cycling network downtown. It needs proper facilities. This isn't the case on John.
They need to cut two lanes, then add a bidirectional facility on one side and take the other lane and add half a lanes worth of sidewalk width on both sides of the street.
Yonge is the only one to really have potential to add cycle lanes in the near future. Yonge also has better connections to the waterfront. Church has no rail corridor underpass and has limited potential due to streetcar tracks, Bay is a vehicle highway and would be difficult to properly adapt.
Yonge can be reduced to a local vehicle access if you really want, sort of like what they are planning on King. But I really believe a high quality cycling corridor is key on the street.