Saturday, April 19, 2014Clear 0°C
City

Rob Ford on removing the Jarvis Street bike lanes

Posted by Derek Flack / June 28, 2011

Jarvis Bike Lanes RemovalIn the wake of the Public Works Committee's decision to scrap the Jarvis bike lanes, a number of cycling advocates have taken the time to email the mayor regarding his support of their removal. Pasted below is the standard response that they've received. Although it's a stock email, it's nevertheless intriguing on account of Ford's characterization of the "experiment" as a failure and his general reasoning as to why: a threefold increase in cycling traffic still pales in comparison to the vehicular traffic facing delays.

No editorial from me on this one. Having heard a number of comments asking why Ford is not swayed by the increased traffic numbers, I thought I'd give the floor to the man himself. And, for those wondering how the City Council vote on the matter might shake out, Matt Elliott does some speculative number-crunching on his blog, Ford for Toronto.

Here's the email from the mayor.

--

Thank you for your email regarding the bike lanes on Jarvis Street. I appreciate hearing from you.

Toronto's economy loses billions of dollars every year from gridlock and traffic congestion. We need to make the situation better - not worse. The Jarvis Street bike lanes experiment has been a failure. Ninety-four percent of commuters now face longer commutes on Jarvis Street. Over 15,000 commuters each day are suffering from longer travel times, for the sake of 600 additional cyclists.

The City should remove the bike lanes as soon as possible and improve travel times for thousands of daily commuters. City staff have been directed to develop a low-cost plan to do so. Bike lanes were never intended to be installed on Jarvis Street. The original Environmental Assessment recommended against installing bike lanes - but City Council amended the report to approve bike lanes anyway.

As promised during the mayoral election, I am dedicated to delivering customer service excellence, creating a transparent and accountable government, reducing the size and cost of government and building a transportation city.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts. Please feel free to contact my office again at any time.

Yours truly,

Mayor Rob Ford
City of Toronto

--

Photo by Martin Reis in the blogTO Flickr pool.

Discussion

124 Comments

AV / June 28, 2011 at 01:30 pm
user-pic
I was sent the same e-mail today, line for line, from the Mayor's office after I had sent him a note asking to keep the bike lanes.

Pre-fab replies for all!
Steven / June 28, 2011 at 01:31 pm
user-pic
I love using the Jarvis bike lanes, and it's a hassle to have them removed, but it makes sense to get rid of them. Plenty of people bike around this city on streets without bike lanes, and for those who are biking from an environmental standpoint, there is more harm to be done with traffic congestion.
robb. / June 28, 2011 at 01:37 pm
user-pic
Yeah, because the solution to traffic congestion is to make the lanes wider, not get unnecessary cars off of the road...
You're so smart, Ford.
Paul / June 28, 2011 at 01:39 pm
user-pic
I was sent the same reply to a message that didn't even mention the Jarvis lanes by name:
http://tracer99.blogspot.com/2011/06/letter-to-rob-ford-city-infrastructure.html
cultureshot / June 28, 2011 at 01:44 pm
user-pic
Bike lanes or no, the number of cyclists will only increase.
Judylicious / June 28, 2011 at 01:51 pm
user-pic
Yours truly,

Mayor Mark Towhey
City of Toronto
ihy / June 28, 2011 at 01:55 pm
user-pic
I think anyone who drives a car should be taxed. Those who have to drive (ie. Taxis, delivery trucks and such) will get a tax rebate. And all that extra money should be put to public transit.
Marlon / June 28, 2011 at 01:55 pm
user-pic
could it be that the increased travel times are related to all the condos that have popped up in that time and the cars that come with it? such stupidity.

Cultureshot you are exactly right. these morons believe that getting rid of bike lanes means getting rid of cyclists. I will be riding my bike in the car lane when this happens. i encourage others to do the same
Taylor / June 28, 2011 at 01:57 pm
user-pic
Ha! "Ninety-four percent of commuters now face longer commutes on Jarvis Street... Over 15,000 commuters each day are suffering from longer travel times" Where a 'longer travel time' constitutes an additional 2-5 minutes each way, according to the City report. Oh, the suffering! Oh, the humanity! The plight of the Toronto Driver is too much to bear!
sezme / June 28, 2011 at 01:59 pm
user-pic
As a longtime downtown cyclist, I couldn't care less whether a street has bike lanes or not. In many cases, bike lanes (the typical Toronto no-barrier style lanes) make it cycling less safe than in would be otherwise, because the moment a car blocks a bike lane, the cyclist is forced to occupy an area of the road where cars don't expect bicycles to be.

But Ford is still a jerk.
DC / June 28, 2011 at 02:00 pm
user-pic
It's funny that he uses the number 15000 because the number in the staff report is 13000.
Do they just make this shit up?
Mike / June 28, 2011 at 02:00 pm
user-pic
I live on Jarvis. I bike on Jarvis. When I have to drive I hate the delays that have been introduced since the bike lanes were introduced - but I'd also like to see the City properly sync the stop lights on Jarvis before they spend money taking out the bike lanes.
Mayor of Petoria replying to a comment from ihy / June 28, 2011 at 02:02 pm
user-pic
PVT? We had that... your friendly neighbourhood mayor conveniently scrapped it.
Taylor / June 28, 2011 at 02:04 pm
user-pic
@Marlon I wholeheartedly praise cyclists who take up a full lane, and I think more need to do it. Good for you!
Cyclists will ride with or without bike lanes, and I feel like the more traffic gets jammed up and drivers complain about how difficult it is to drive in this city because of 'all the damn cyclists', the sooner there will be a push for separate lanes.
GORF / June 28, 2011 at 02:09 pm
user-pic
Chris Farley with Down Syndrome strikes again! Hopefully our exalted leader will have a heart attack sometime soon.
Mik / June 28, 2011 at 02:11 pm
user-pic
Jarvis is busy with cars because it's easily connected to Bloor, Mount Pleasant and cuts through downtown. Bicyclists use it for the same reasons. Removing bike lanes isn't going to magically make the bicycles disappear, they'll just be sharing the lanes with cars instead, like before. Car congestion won't improve but everyone sharing the road will be pissed off more of the time than they are now.

It's nice to want people to ride bikes on Sherbourne, but riders will take the streets that are convenient and go where they need to be with the least amount of detours, just like drivers. Anything else is unrealistic.

I take the subway to work but occasionally run commute home up Jarvis and it's clear to me that the street is vastly improved without the middle lane, without parking, and with bike lanes.
Jerome / June 28, 2011 at 02:14 pm
user-pic
This whole issue pisses me off. No matter what the city does with Jarvis, bike lanes will exist!

Bike lanes are provincial law......on every street. No city council can change that.

So, by painting lanes, you only create a guideline that makes things more safe and accessible.

Erasing lines does not remove the lanes.
AV replying to a comment from GORF / June 28, 2011 at 02:14 pm
user-pic
Don't say that, then Doug will worm his way into power. Oh no, wait, he's just biding his time until he runs for the federal Cons in Etobicoke North..
Tom replying to a comment from Marlon / June 28, 2011 at 02:18 pm
user-pic
I don't even commute on that road, not anywhere near it, but on my days off I'll take a few rides through it during rush our for shits and giggles. See what mayor dumbass has to say about bike lanes then.
Tom replying to a comment from DC / June 28, 2011 at 02:19 pm
user-pic
Yes. they do make it up, all of it.
swellman / June 28, 2011 at 02:21 pm
user-pic
I say we petition to get Ford to ride a bicycle in the city for one whole week, preferably only on bike lanes.
Kieren / June 28, 2011 at 02:23 pm
user-pic
Bike on it anyways. The drivers will be mad either way.
Alexandra / June 28, 2011 at 02:25 pm
user-pic
It's good to know the bike lanes will be removed.
JJ / June 28, 2011 at 02:25 pm
user-pic
Way to go, Toronto!

I'm glad to see our city take such a progressive stance and buck the trend of helmet-head friendly cities by being the only city in the Western World to be removing cycling infrastructure!

Rising oil prices? Who cares? Obesity epidemic? Obesity Schmepidemic! Decreasing Air Quality? Who needs air anyways? That's what Air Conditioning is for!

In all seriousness, though, I encourage all those who cycle on Jarvis to do as I do on every street without a proper bike lane (which is almost all of them): If you don't feel safe riding in the curb lane, claim your lane. You are a vehicle. Obey the laws and the rules of the road, but claim your lane to FORCE drivers to recognize your presence.

First the public health nurses, now the Jarvis lane... what's on the chopping block next?
Jacob / June 28, 2011 at 02:26 pm
user-pic

Yeah, they keep saying they need to remove the bike lanes to ease congestion, but has anyone bothered to explain how exactly that's going to work? From what I understand, they aren't planning to reinstall the reversible middle lane, so apparently we're going to have the exact same number of lanes as we do now, plus cyclists are going to keep on using Jarvis regardless, only now they'll be impeding cars because they have to share a lane....all to the tune of $90k spent to install the bike lanes and $70k to take them out again...

Jarvis is a nightmare because of all the idiots trying to make left turns in gridlock traffic. If they want to speed it up, they ought to install left-turn lanes at some of the intersections and advance greens.
Dan / June 28, 2011 at 02:28 pm
user-pic
Can't wait to get the extra lanes back on Jarvis. It has been more congested since and bikes had no problem using the road before the change. It's just "bike lane removal" not "bikes banned from using jarvis st"
moony / June 28, 2011 at 02:29 pm
user-pic
In direct contrast to what's happening in Europe:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/science/earth/27traffic.html?_r=1
weknow replying to a comment from JJ / June 28, 2011 at 02:32 pm
user-pic
"First the public health nurses, now the Jarvis lane... what's on the chopping block next?"

we know it wont be the police that is for sure.
Gordon / June 28, 2011 at 02:34 pm
user-pic
Why would we expect a suburban mayor to get the benefit for all of bike traffic in the downtown? More bike traffic means less cars, less people on transit, less pollution, healthier people putting less of a drag on our medical services, and more livable space in our city that doesn't pretend streets like Jarvis are strictly highways for suburbanites to commute to work. Will the madness ever end? I'll feel better if I knew it would at 4 years but I wouldn't place money on that either.
Dan D replying to a comment from AV / June 28, 2011 at 02:42 pm
user-pic
@AV - Do you actually expect him to sit there all day responding to all 600 of you dumb hippies?

Danielle / June 28, 2011 at 02:50 pm
user-pic
This would be all fine and good if they MAINTAINED the Sherbourne bike lanes that are nothing but potholes for years now.
Marlon replying to a comment from JJ / June 28, 2011 at 02:56 pm
user-pic
Whats next on the chopping block? Bill Blair. And it is a shame because the meat head Ford would have him replaced with will make Fantino look progressive.
Jarvis Cyclist / June 28, 2011 at 02:56 pm
user-pic
Once the bike lanes are gone, I will bike on Jarvis St in the traffic lane, meaning that no cars will be able to use it because I will take the lane. They will have switch a lane to pass me... oh well, let see how that improves the traffic
Tom replying to a comment from Dan D / June 28, 2011 at 02:56 pm
user-pic
Nah, of course not, he's gotta have time for the constant blow-job you're giving him.

Let me ask you ford sycophants something: What has ford done for you? How has he improved your lives or your neighborhood? what sort of picture do you think he's he painted of you all with his obvious bigotry and hate mongering? Are those the values you represent (hatred, bigotry, intolerance, abject stupidity)?
AV replying to a comment from Dan D / June 28, 2011 at 03:03 pm
user-pic
Cool story bro. BTW, how's living in a bubble?
Kieren replying to a comment from Dan D / June 28, 2011 at 03:15 pm
user-pic
No, but he sure loves you you car-nazi
Matt / June 28, 2011 at 03:20 pm
user-pic
To be honest, I think Ford AND the cyclists' lobby are in the wrong here. The original plans for a revitalized Jarvis Street suggested removing one lane of traffic and widening the sidewalks and planting more trees, encouraging more streetfront retail, and turning Jarvis into more of a neighbourhood street.

Then the cyclists' union got involved and hijacked the discussion with bike lanes. For all the good work they do, the Toronto Cyclists' Union and BikeTO can be a bit narrow-minded in their approach to biking infrastructure. See also: the John Street debate right now.
lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 03:38 pm
user-pic
Vehicles that use gas PAY additional taxes by buying fuel. This is above the car insurance via HST,and land tax if they own a house in Toronto.Cyclists do not contrubute beyond their personal income,or land tax.The city should maybe consider making a "bike lane"on side walks,similar to those park paths?Cyclists should get ticketed for riding in the "pedestrian"lane.Widen the side walk to accommodate if necessary?Better for snow clearing,and motorized vehicles are left alone.IF cement barriers are being considered,city has to use the material anyways?
Steve / June 28, 2011 at 03:47 pm
user-pic
That's fine. Remove them and see how much we can REALLY slow traffic when we're eating up the entire right lane.
dupontbike / June 28, 2011 at 03:52 pm
user-pic
they should hurry up and remove the bike lines on dupont- talk about a wait time
DailyCycler / June 28, 2011 at 04:14 pm
user-pic
As an avid cycler and one who bikes downtown every day to work I must say that the ride has been easier since the Jarvis bike lanes were installed.

However, I never understood why you would choose the main thoroughfare as a bike lane. There should be a dedicated street like Sherbourne that has isolated bike lanes.

And to all those that threaten to take up an entire lane of traffic - you deserve to be hit by the car that you are inconveniencing. You clearly have no respect for the other people that live in this city and and are an embarrassment.

We should find ways to live amongst each other - banning a car is impossible when most of the "cyclists" in this city are also a bunch of tree huggers who whine and cry when the city raises taxes to fund public transportation.

Pick your battles my friends......
Mark / June 28, 2011 at 04:24 pm
user-pic
15,000 commuters > 600 cyclists.
Mark replying to a comment from Steve / June 28, 2011 at 04:25 pm
user-pic
Cyclists should have insurance and be licensed too, since you're so keen on pretending to be a car by taking up a whole lane.
JM / June 28, 2011 at 04:29 pm
user-pic
The report has said the reason Jarvis has delays is because of Left-Turning auto traffic, not cyclists. Simply banning left turns during rush hour at all intersections (like Bay St does) will solve the problem.

Go ahead and remove them, nothing will change, traffic will actually slow down because now they have to dodge bikes.

More money thrown down the toilet with absolutely no result. I thought this guy was supposed to be a fiscal conservative.
Steve replying to a comment from Mark / June 28, 2011 at 04:35 pm
user-pic
Well genius, we're all governed by the highway traffic act so that lane is as much mine as it is yours. You can have a seat now.
Driver / June 28, 2011 at 04:35 pm
user-pic
All you fucking bike riding dick heads should be killed, You want this and that but never follow traffic rules, go through red lights, stop signs etc etc. I drive for a living and see this every god dam day. You all make me sick!!!!!!!!
Mark replying to a comment from Steve / June 28, 2011 at 04:41 pm
user-pic
How abouts following the rules of the road then? I.e. Stopping at red lights and stop lights. Also my favorite; cycling in the right direction! Those cyclists that run north in southbound lanes on Spadina are wicked awesome, dude.
AngryDriver replying to a comment from Steve / June 28, 2011 at 04:43 pm
user-pic
Well asshole, the difference is that my car has a license plate, so when I'm driving like a dbag you can call and report me. You, on the other hand, are free to swerve between cars, ride on the sidewalk and run red lights without anyone being able to properly identify you. YOU can have a seat now.
Driver / June 28, 2011 at 04:44 pm
user-pic
ps wahhhhhhhh!!!!! and boo hoo.
lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 04:52 pm
user-pic
For those cyclists who purposely slow down motorized vehicles,check out the link. Cyclists pay no where near the fines they should,even in a Mayor Ford era. While driving in congested Kensington Market this past weekend,2 cyclists drove against traffic,in between parked cars. Super dangerous,they did NOT care. If they damaged any vehicle pulling this stunt,there's no license plate for a driver to report.Earlier in the week,a cyclist challenged a large box truck changing lanes with an indicator*The driver was being very cautious,used his mirrors. I thought I was going to witness a dude being crushed under the truck's tires.Cyclist actually was yelling at the truck driver. If cyclist got crushed for unsafe lane change, the truck driver wouldn't be at fault. Fully separated lane's way to go as motorized vehicle wins despite fault.
Nick replying to a comment from Jacob / June 28, 2011 at 04:53 pm
user-pic
$160k spent literally for nothing, just like that - it makes trying to save a few thousand on City Hall office expenses seem ridiculous! And agreed, Jacob, so if they are not reinstalling the middle lane, how's that "Respect for Taxpayers" or even "Respect for Car Drivers".

The war on the car is a intramodal war, with car drivers pitted against one another. Cyclists have nothing to do with the fact that cars can't get around. It's all the other drivers who want to get to exactly where you're trying to get to in your SUV.
mike / June 28, 2011 at 04:56 pm
user-pic
"Nah, of course not, he's gotta have time for the constant blow-job you're giving him.

Let me ask you ford sycophants something: What has ford done for you? How has he improved your lives or your neighborhood? what sort of picture do you think he's he painted of you all with his obvious bigotry and hate mongering? Are those the values you represent (hatred, bigotry, intolerance, abject stupidity)?"

Has your second paragraph met your first paragraph? You sound like a pretty hateful stupid intolerant bigot in the first half.
christ almighty / June 28, 2011 at 04:56 pm
user-pic
what is with all the hostility?

the people in this city do nothing but bitch and moan and whinge at each other about everything. constant battles, constant arguments, everything turns into a "war on the ______". Its online, its in the newspapers, its everywhere.

and its fucking pathetic. we are a sad, useless bunch of retards with visions of grandeur that tries to hide the bitching, moaning, provincial, regressive reality.



DundasRider replying to a comment from lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 05:05 pm
user-pic
Do we need to point out for the 1000th time that gas taxes don't go to the city, so have nothing to do with city streets?

(And besides that, they don't even pay for all the breathing related illnesses that burning said gas causes.)
DundasRider replying to a comment from Mark / June 28, 2011 at 05:07 pm
user-pic
I live on a short street in the Dundas/Dufferin area. Every weekend, at least a dozen cars a day go down our one-way street the wrong way, and every day, dozens and dozens blow the stop sign at the end. So please don't imply only cyclists do these things.
DundasRider replying to a comment from lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 05:11 pm
user-pic
Lonewolf: Your link includes the following text: "Cyclists are allowed to safely use the full lane if staying close to the right edge of the road is unsafe."

That means if the cyclist doesn't think it is practical or safe to allow a large vehicle to force them off the road or into a pothole, they're allowed to ride further to the left to prevent the other vehicle from mistakenly attempting to do so.
Douglas replying to a comment from lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 05:13 pm
user-pic
Wait Lonewolf, you are honestly are arguing that you get all the road because you pay gas tax and insurance but cyclists don't? They don't use those things, why should they pay taxes on them?

Should they also be paying marina taxes cause someone else owns a boat?

Oh, and for those arguing cyclists should have insurance, do you understand the point of insurance? Insurance is to cover you when something very valuable gets damaged and is difficult to repair.

That's why we have insurance for things like health, cars, houses, life - all very valuable and expensive to repair.

At the same time that's why we don't have insurance for relatively things like running shoes, skateboards, sticks of gum and bicycles.

The most expensive repair I have done for a bike is $150... its not worth it to insure.
Ryan / June 28, 2011 at 05:57 pm
user-pic
The Jarvis lane is kind of pointless, but if they get rid of it they need to do some serious repairs on Sherbourne. Possibly the worst road I've been on with my bike. Toronto roads are in shit condition, I'd rather they focus on repairing the existing network before they start expanding the bike lane system. Both should get done though.
AV replying to a comment from lonewolf / June 28, 2011 at 06:10 pm
user-pic
Whoa whoa.... WHO DRIVES THROUGH KENNSINGTON, on a weekend no less?!?!? lol...
max / June 28, 2011 at 06:52 pm
user-pic
Sounds like ol' Mayor Ford is sticking his finger in the gravy dish if you ask me.

If he's so concerned about spending maybe he should read some of that research on left turn lanes before he spends the what-is-it-70K on ripping out bike lanes.

*sigh*

This applies to about 500 things he's done since he got into office. So keen to cancel out whatever Miller's legacy was suppose to be he's paying cancellation fees and contract breaking fees at every turn. I'd love to know what that adds up to by the end of his term.
robSMASH replying to a comment from max / June 28, 2011 at 07:14 pm
user-pic
I'd like to know too... but, rob don't like numbers. rob likes acting out of anger and ignorance and, thus, irrationally.

Count me in as a centre of the lane cyclist whenever I feel unsafe - potholes, parked cars or when it's too tight - and, it's legal:

HTA 147 - Slow moving traffic travel on right side
any vehicle moving slower than the normal traffic speed should drive in the right-hand lane, or as close as practicable to the right edge of the road except when preparing to turn left or when passing another vehicle. For cyclists, you must ride far enough out from the curb to maintain a straight line, clear of sewer grates, debris, potholes, and parked car doors. You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you.

We need a co-ordinated effort to grind this city to a stop - the mayor isn't listening to anything else.
Jer / June 28, 2011 at 07:22 pm
user-pic
We should hold a bike protest on Jarvis.
Paul / June 28, 2011 at 07:24 pm
user-pic
"improve travel times for thousands of daily commuters."

If the city was at all serious about this. They would remove parking from major streets in certain sections of the city. Try portions of King St as a test to start.
robert / June 28, 2011 at 08:27 pm
user-pic
I noticed the numbers changed from the report I saw here and his letter.
Vehicular traffic went from 13000 to 15000
Cycle traffic went from 860 to 600.
3-5 min am north then 3-5 to min pm south on Jarvis to 94% of all commutes.
He was elected with this kind of math.

I just assume the centre lane would be put back. If not what would be the benefit of removing them be. But to be mean spirited and petty.

piero / June 28, 2011 at 08:38 pm
user-pic
I have to question the clarity and competency of the staff that put the studies together. It's clear that the delay to vehicle traffic is caused by cars trying to turn left with one less lane to go past that turning traffic. The city is already fixing that by widening the lane at the turn by removing a parking space. Alternatively, this city could embrace more (and longer) advance green traffic lights.
Walk&Bike / June 28, 2011 at 09:15 pm
user-pic
Anyone who drives their car in the downtown core of Toronto as far as I'm concerned is an idiot. You can walk faster, commute by ttc or go train and cycle way more easily! Bikes will be on the road bike lane or not and I think more people should find an alternative in the downtown core than using a car. It will save you money and anything else will probably get you to your destination faster.
hellebelle / June 28, 2011 at 10:02 pm
user-pic
awesome, i got the same email reply from ford a couple days ago! at least he's consistent...
liketoroll / June 28, 2011 at 10:17 pm
user-pic
"I'd like to know too... but, rob don't like numbers. rob likes acting out of anger and ignorance and, thus, irrationally."

That's how the righties roll..............
Zach Swan replying to a comment from Taylor / June 28, 2011 at 10:39 pm
user-pic
Oh the humanity? Oh the suffering? That's a very shortsighted view. Take 30 seconds and look at the aggregate impact. The simple math is that those 5 minutes a day add up to a huge impact in lost productivity. If we believe monetary value to time (I do), how much are the 156 eight hour days that are wasted every single day for the convenience of 600 cyclists on Jarvis? (Most of whom would either drive on the road or take another route anyhow.) It sucks that you lost your bike lanes but it was a boneheaded decision to deploy them there in the first place.
Zach Swan replying to a comment from Steve / June 28, 2011 at 10:43 pm
user-pic
Well Steve, you can have that lane if you can keep up with the 'ordinary speed of traffic', which means when it is moving properly you better be able to keep your bike rolling at 40 - 50 kph. If not, the law says you do not have the right to own the lane. You have to move over to let faster traffic pass.
gadfly replying to a comment from Walk&Bike / June 28, 2011 at 10:51 pm
user-pic
... and that is the quote of the day. I drove my bike from Atlantic/King to College/Bay in 1981 - for about 3 weeks. It was dangerous, slow and stupid. That was when all the land was vacant Massey Ferguson property. No condos. I got a batter job and bought a car (pickup actually) and never looked back. Why would I?
Two weeks ago, I had the misfortune of taking the TTC to work: 45 minutes for a drive that averages me 16.
Walk&Bike, I have a life. Those 30 minutes a day (each way mean something to me.) My life also means something to me and cycling is just, well, crazy.
That's my point of view. You have yours. May the best man (or woman) win... and, so far, we are.

Deal with it.
thestreets replying to a comment from Zach Swan / June 28, 2011 at 11:19 pm
user-pic
try reading all the way through:

HTA 147 - Slow moving traffic travel on right side
any vehicle moving slower than the normal traffic speed should drive in the right-hand lane, or as close as practicable to the right edge of the road except when preparing to turn left or when passing another vehicle. For cyclists, you must ride far enough out from the curb to maintain a straight line, clear of sewer grates, debris, potholes, and parked car doors. You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you.
Mr.S / June 28, 2011 at 11:32 pm
user-pic
I forgot just how hateful a place Toronto is. Rob, and the drivers on the thread here, thanks for reminding me why I am staying overseas.
Antony / June 28, 2011 at 11:44 pm
user-pic
Anyone whose house sits on cul-de-sac, stop-sign mined non-through-roads has no business complaining about Jarvis residents wanting to reclaim their neighborhood from traffic. You bought your house because it was on "a quiet street", and want to drive everywhere else.

The War on the Car is a civil war, fought by suburbanites against other suburbanites.
joey jeremiah / June 29, 2011 at 12:04 am
user-pic
Lonewolf said: "Vehicles that use gas PAY additional taxes by buying fuel. This is above the car insurance via HST,and land tax if they own a house in Toronto.Cyclists do not contrubute beyond their personal income,or land tax."

City streets are paid for by property tax. Gasoline taxes go to the Province and pay for provincial highways. Everyone in Toronto pays property tax (including tenants - landlords make it from rent). We all pay for our streets, so room has to exist for all of us - motorists, transit, cyclists and pedestrians.
wheels / June 29, 2011 at 12:06 am
user-pic
if you take out the bike lanes, where will all the bikes go?

into the "car lanes"...

nice plan, mr. mayor!
3wheeler / June 29, 2011 at 01:30 am
user-pic
I never though I'd say this, but Ford's right on this one.

1.Traffic:
Jarvis is the only street wide enough to provide a vital N/S connection between the DVP and the Gardiner.
2. Revitalization?
Toronto turned it's back on Jarvis' beautiful architecture a long time ago, and bike traffic was never going to change that. Church Street is a more pleasant ride.
3. Bike lanes are great, but creating gridlock doesn't change habits. Tolls would.
JM replying to a comment from 3wheeler / June 29, 2011 at 03:46 am
user-pic
I'm not sure what you're proposing. Even when Jarvis had the reversible lane it was still gridlocked at rush hour. Once again, as the report says, the cause of the delays on Jarvis is LEFT TURNING AUTOMOBILES, not bikes.

Jarvis is one of the only streets in Toronto wide enough to have bike lanes as well as maintain 2 lanes of traffic in each direction. It's win-win without the risk of head-on collision because people don't know what reversible lanes are. I'm a cyclist and a driver and I think anybody who has regularly driven on Jarvis when it had a reversible lane had the heart stopping experience of somebody speeding toward you head on even though their lane had the Red X.

Tom replying to a comment from Antony / June 29, 2011 at 08:45 am
user-pic
The war on cars huh? Gosh that's retarded. Here's a tip: if ford said it, don't repeat it, lest you look like an idiot. The war on cars is one fought in ford's imagination, and yours, apparently.
Tom replying to a comment from gadfly / June 29, 2011 at 08:54 am
user-pic
oh gadfly, again, don't bother, you're not "winning" anything and you come off as a fuckin moron. Not opinionated, not educated, just borderline retarded. You're embarassing yourself.
Mark / June 29, 2011 at 09:03 am
user-pic
If you want to reduce gridlock, public transit is the way to go. Bike lanes do nothing, the gta isn't stockholm sweden where people can bike 10km to work every day A single, region wide, comprehensive transit system is needed in the gta. All levels of gov't have been sitting on their ass for the last 30 years.

I drive downtown, because it is still faster than taking mississauga transit, go transit and ttc. And it costs about the same price too.
Ryan replying to a comment from Mark / June 29, 2011 at 09:13 am
user-pic
Mark writes: "15,000 commuters > 600 cyclists."

With that logic, I look forward to Yonge Street being reduced to one lane, and having much wider sidewalks. Think that will happen?
tdot replying to a comment from Ryan / June 29, 2011 at 09:23 am
user-pic
I believe he was talking about cyclists and motorists, not pedestrians. Irrelevant point.
the lemur replying to a comment from gadfly / June 29, 2011 at 09:35 am
user-pic
So your experience 30 years ago is indicative of the traffic situation you decry now? When you 'drove' your bike then, how long did that take you? How on earth could it be 'slow'? Slower than a bus? Sometimes. Slower than the subway? With all the stops and delays, I doubt it.

As for safety, you have a pretty good idea of where bikes should and shouldn't ride, right?

You know how sometimes you have to time your drive so as not to get stuck in traffic? Never happens with a bike. If you were really concerned about how long a bike commute took you, you might do something like, I don't know, leave earlier? But that would cut into your valuable morning post-dopey-comments-online time.
Zach Swan replying to a comment from thestreets / June 29, 2011 at 09:54 am
user-pic
'when safety warrants it' - whoever wrote that post about the HTA147 added some editorial. The act does not say that. Being afraid of cars or angry at a political decision does not contitute 'safety warranting it' anyhow. Here is the actual text of the act:

Slow vehicles to travel on right side
147.  (1)  Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of the roadway. R.S.O. 1990, c. ;H.8, s. ;147 (1).
Jeremy / June 29, 2011 at 10:03 am
user-pic
Drivers, you're right, there are awful bicyclists. Bicyclists, you're right, there are awful drivers. To all, making decisions based on the lowest common denominator is dumb. Saying we should drop bike lanes because there are bad bicyclists or put lanes in because there are bad drivers is dumb. To that end, we'd have to abolish driving altogether because some people drive drunk. ... Don't be dumb, cause you're not, you're just angry.
Zach Swan replying to a comment from robSMASH / June 29, 2011 at 10:03 am
user-pic
... And i sincerely hope that if you try impeding traffic in such a way, putting yourself and everyone else nearby at risk because of your selfish, politically motivated behaviour that the police choose to enforce the actual law and not the one you've rewritten to suit your agenda. Beyond HTA147, how does this one suit you?

Bicycles overtaken
(6)  Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision. R.S.O. 1990, c. ;H.8, s. ;148 (6).
Adam H. replying to a comment from Zach Swan / June 29, 2011 at 11:38 am
user-pic
Zach, section 148 doesn't trump cyclist safety. If a cyclist needs the centre of the lane to ride safely, then overtaking vehicles have no precedence. That's the "practicable" part of sec. 147.

From the MTO website: "You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you", specifically in reference to section 147.
Steve replying to a comment from Mark / June 29, 2011 at 01:55 pm
user-pic
Yeah well. Maybe you should go whine to the police to enforce traffic laws on cyclists. Good luck with that. Your rage is delicious btw.
Adam H. replying to a comment from DailyCycler / June 29, 2011 at 02:13 pm
user-pic
"And to all those that threaten to take up an entire lane of traffic - you deserve to be hit by the car that you are inconveniencing."

Yes, being killed is certainly an appropriate thing to have happen for inconveniencing a car. Idiot.

Maybe if you learned as this supposed "avid cycler" that cyclISTS have the right to any part of the lane that safety warrants they take, you'd get over this murderously stupid wish to see cyclISTS killed because they wish to ride on a safe part of the road.
DAILYCYCLERISADUMBASS replying to a comment from DailyCycler / June 29, 2011 at 02:50 pm
user-pic
Are you a fucking idiot?? You deserved to be killed just for that stupid comment you made.
zack morris / June 29, 2011 at 03:54 pm
user-pic
what is it about comment sections that turn so many people into internet tough guys who pretend to be angry?
marlon replying to a comment from DAILYCYCLERISADUMBASS / June 29, 2011 at 03:58 pm
user-pic
simmer down. i'm sure its life is the better punishment.
Mark replying to a comment from Steve / June 29, 2011 at 04:02 pm
user-pic
Or I can just sit back and watch Rob Ford remove the rights of the cyclists. More enjoyable, their rage is delicious.
marlon / June 29, 2011 at 04:12 pm
user-pic
lol, miserable twat^^^^^
Mike replying to a comment from Driver / June 29, 2011 at 05:03 pm
user-pic
Are you even old enough to drive?
Mike replying to a comment from Mark / June 29, 2011 at 05:14 pm
user-pic
Ahh, you drive downtown from Mississauga. So you come onto this site and tell people who actually live in Toronto and pay taxes in Toronto, how to run our own city?
lol replying to a comment from gadfly / June 29, 2011 at 05:33 pm
user-pic
now i picture you as a redneck righty driving a beat up pick up through down town toronto.
Mark replying to a comment from Mike / June 29, 2011 at 05:55 pm
user-pic
Yeah, because in the real world, the buck doesn't stop at the border between 416 and 905. Municipal decisions regarding traffic affect the whole region. Wanna reduce traffic? Give better options to get to and from downtown. You must be a snob that thinks that life doesn't exist outside of the DT core.
Adam H. replying to a comment from Mark / June 29, 2011 at 06:16 pm
user-pic
See, you're the type of driver that should be paying tolls, seeing as my property taxes are maintaining the roads you drive on for free.

You should also be paying tolls for being a dick.
lonewolf / June 29, 2011 at 09:27 pm
user-pic
For those who believe gas tax doesn't fund roads in municipalities,read the link.

I'd like to know what part of this cyclists contribute back to Ontario because they don't buy fuel,and pay the tax on it:

http://www.rev.gov.on.ca/en/bulletins/gt/gas1_2003.html


Can the cyclists lay out their monthly costs to run their bikes? The taxes from the cost of operating a vehicle for drivers is NOT all going to fund city roads,but it's going to the province,and federally.I don't think I can even go buy a meal off a dollar menu at those fast food spots with the monthly taxes a cyclist pays?


To improve the roads,offer safer shared bicycle/sidewalk type paths,I agree with tolls.NO one group should bare the burden of the infrastructure costs.


For the person who felt it was ridiculous to drive in Kensington market,everyone has equal access to every part of Toronto.Especially those who use an accessibility permit to be able to travel to ,and park in as many places as they want in the city.

Adam H. replying to a comment from lonewolf / June 29, 2011 at 09:30 pm
user-pic
Provincial and federal gas taxes don't go to infrastructure - they go to general revenue, just like GST and HST.

So, for instance, me - what I don't spend on a car and associated expenses, I do spend on a lot of other things, and I pay taxes on all of those things. The idea that gas taxes are somehow more of a monetary force towards roads and infrastructure than any other sales tax is laughable.
NOPN / June 29, 2011 at 09:37 pm
user-pic
Municipal governments don't exist under the constitution. They are slaves to the provincial and federal gov'ts. Muncipalities can't do squat without the blessing of the province...they can't refuse either (hence amalgamation)


That being said the federal and provincial gas taxes could fund infrastructure, but they chose to put it elsewhere.
lonewolf replying to a comment from Adam H. / June 29, 2011 at 11:27 pm
user-pic
we're talking about two items: car,and bike. Latter feeling entitled based on their contributions to the city finances as cyclists to have a lane on Toronto roads. Not what consumer goods we buy monthly.Unless you work at the City of Toronto,do you really have the break down of what Toronto's provincial, and federal allocation of that revenue share? Probably the ONLY thing I agreed with Miller on,Toronto needs a bigger share from the province,and federal government.The municipality spends the funds as they choose,so what "should" pay for infrastructure may not.
Tom replying to a comment from Mark / June 30, 2011 at 02:59 pm
user-pic
Or, you can continue using and reusing a line you stole from Sue on Glee, who, it may interest you to know (since you're a homophobe) that the actress that plays her is a lesbian. Oh no! what're you going to do?! All this time, your role model's been a, uh, a, omgosh! LESBIAN! gaaaaaaahhhh.... I'm relishing this life unravelling before your eyes moment.
John Godfrey Spragge replying to a comment from Mark / July 3, 2011 at 04:09 am
user-pic
Want better options for getting in and out of downtown? How about: GO train, GO bus, Mississauga transfer to TTC (bus & subway), Kiss and ride at Kipling, park and ride at Kipling. Need I go on? Oh, yes, bike: a commute between Mississauga and Toronto makes a quite reasonable bicycle ride.
Marlon / July 3, 2011 at 08:37 am
user-pic
Amen! These drivers are their own worst enemy. The attacks on bikes and bike lanes is just the drivers looking for someone else to blame.
Mark replying to a comment from Tom / July 3, 2011 at 03:46 pm
user-pic
Who said anything about being a homophobe and anti-gay? What does sexuality have to do with the Jarvis bike lanes? Traffic from the 905 to 416 and back? Public transit?
Pat T replying to a comment from DC / July 7, 2011 at 04:15 pm
user-pic
Remember, Rob Ford gets all his arguments from his own Oracle of Delphi, ie the 'X percentage of people who call me are opposed' approach. While we have no way of verifying if these call to Ford actually happened, it's nice that he leaves his major decisions to a higher power.
Loki replying to a comment from GORF / July 11, 2011 at 12:28 pm
user-pic
That's an comment that could only be made by a jerk (wishing someone had a heart attack).
Bikes2Go / July 13, 2011 at 10:36 pm
user-pic
I agree with Ford, remove the bike lanes. I used to take Jarvis to go to work and has become a parking lot, now I have to take Chaplin, Eglinton to take the 401 another nightmare. Honestly how many bikes are on those lanes, I have taken Jarvins in rush hour and I have counted no more than 10 and that's a lot. And as the Council of the Warden for Rosedale said that the lanes will bring prosperity, that's nonsense. Comon the bikers are students and people with low income, they don't have the income to bring prosperity to the area. I hate to say it but people that take JArvis are people working downtown (Professionals) and people going WEst (Professionals) that keep the economy going. Open Sherbourne for bikers or Church street but not Jarvis. Get bikers out!!!!
jeremy replying to a comment from Bikes2Go / July 14, 2011 at 09:16 am
user-pic
Students don't bring prosperity to the area? Are you serious? I guess students don't ever become professionals? Guess they better rethink all those colleges and universities they keep allowing to expand in the downtown core... wonder why they're building those. Your convenience isn't anymore important than anyone else's so get off your high horse. And the low income thing, holy, if you want to live in a world without a safety net i guess you're one of the ones who will never take a risk on a small business or up start, better safe than sorry but no great things happen without being able to take risks. One false move in your precious little job downtown and you'll have nothing to fall back on. In this world, some people get lucky, some don't. Don't think you're any different. Half the people you refer to with low income worked twice as hard as you their whole life only to get there.

The only reason for or against a bike lane, is whether or not it works to keep traffic flow for all optimal. Bicyclists are going to bike. Deal with it as best we can. I enjoy the jarvis bike lane, and i'm not a Ford fan, but i'm not going to pretend that i know whether or not that particular lane is working to keep traffic flowing through an ever expanding city.
Notorious / July 17, 2011 at 06:18 pm
user-pic
Question to all motor vehicle supporters - what do you intend to burn when fossil fuels run dry? How long will you continue to pollute the air for your children?

What is it going to take to stop the gravy train of suburbans taking downtown toronto for granted as their own personal highway?

We live here. You don't, and have no right to speak for those who do.
Notorious / July 17, 2011 at 06:19 pm
user-pic
60,000$ to put them in, almost $500,000 to take them out... costs are being increased unneccesarily.

Rob Ford IS the gravy train - and it stops here.
Bobbyjo / July 18, 2011 at 09:24 am
user-pic
I am a pedestrian, cyclist and car driver - in that order. I walk 90% of the time, I cycle on back streets and I sometimes rent a car for various things. I pay property taxes that should entitle me to use the road either on foot or on my bike. The allocation of taxes in this city in 2009 for transportation infrastructure which includes lights, road works etc is $10 billion dollars. In the winter the snow cleaners make it more difficult for me to walk. What do I as a taxpayer get for my taxes to the city. I think it is time that pedestrians and cyclists began a united campaign against the city to demand that we are fairly represented in the expenditure of this money. Cars are always the priority and it is time to stop. And while we are at it we can also count the cost of all the traffic reports that take up so much air time on the radio. How much does the car cost this society? If people really want to save money and cut taxes then the best place to start is with cars. The savings would be huge. No snow removal, no fixing traffic lights, no fixing roads, health costs would be reduced and I am sure this is a limited list.
Bobbyjo / July 18, 2011 at 09:34 am
user-pic
Oh and by the way: The gridlock is all over this city and includes many roads that do not have bike lanes. The few times I do drive and find myself sitting on the Don Valley Parkway not moving or on the 401 not moving or the 400 not moving I wonder how or why people put themselves through the stress every single day. I wonder at their masochism. I once had to pick up my daughter, got stuck in suburban traffic and my partner had to go and get her by ttc and was home before I was. I don't gloat over all the drivers sitting in traffic because it is our air they are destroying. I just wish they had more common sense and financial sense. I am so sick of the constant whine of people saying they want to save on taxes but then watching them bow down before the oil companies and give them their hard earned money without a second thought. Those oilmen love your idiocy and they have gotten very, very rich from it.
Fark / July 19, 2011 at 06:01 pm
user-pic
Delusional downtown idiots here i tells ya. So you want 70% (those who commute via auto) of Toronto to get on public transit, which can barely handle the 30% that use the system - CHAOS. And then you want the suburbanites to move back into the city so they wouldn't have such a long commute? Chaos again. Theres no more room to accommodate that many people in the DT core. Seems like you want to pay vancouver type rents and mortgages!

I see all this 'we live downtown you don't' jibberish here. Well the Toronto suburbs (Scarborough, Etobicoke, North York) are all part of TORONTO so the DT core is as much theirs as it is yours.
Mike replying to a comment from Bikes2Go / July 20, 2011 at 11:11 pm
user-pic
@ Bikes2Go.... are you daft?? How can you make such a preposterous claim! I'm an Operations Manager for an Int'l travel company, I work in the financial district and ride my bike to work almost every day! To say those who ride their bikes come from low income households is the most ridiculous statement I've every heard. You don't even deserve to post on this sight. Next time you post make it a bit more intelligent...after all I'm assuming your are a professional (somewhat)...or just someone who wishes they were?
Garcon replying to a comment from ihy / August 2, 2011 at 10:48 pm
user-pic
vous êtes vraiment stupide
Jakester / August 2, 2011 at 11:48 pm
user-pic
Canadians want fat Harvey hamburgers, fat Tim's donuts, fat less-exercise, fat producing cars, smog producing cars and a frenzied notion to be just like English speaking Irishmen from England but, with an American twist so they can call themselves North Americans. Canadians don't want healthy bodies when they can be assured a painless death from cancer or diabetes down at one of the kind hospices. Canadians don't want bicycles to ride to work and smell crappy all day at work and then have to ride home smelling even worse. Canadians want to be like Americans and eat themselves into tomorrows grave heart institutes or smoke themselves into a hospice bed with rotting lungs. Speaking specifically about "white" Canadians -- they just want to enjoy the remains of what is left of the dignity of the World War Veterans and enjoy their sex with less kids to repopulate so 3rd world nations can take over when they die. That's what Canadians want and they show you everyday by their actions. I don't have to make it up. I just say what I see. Get rid of the bicycle lanes.
lalela / August 5, 2011 at 11:27 am
user-pic
HATE FORD? YOULL LOVE THIS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... ROB FORD IN MUSIC FORM

A GREAT WAY TO VENT
Big D replying to a comment from ihy / December 3, 2011 at 10:32 pm
user-pic
People who drive cars already pay taxes on them you moron.
Big D replying to a comment from ihy / December 3, 2011 at 10:36 pm
user-pic
Oh Yeah, Just watched the Bruins stomp the maple leafs...AGAIN...with our 2nd string goalie to boot!!
Guest / February 24, 2012 at 04:36 pm
user-pic
http://imgur.com/a/G3gwV

Add a Comment

Other Cities: Montreal