City
Where should Toronto build separated bike lanes?
In an editorial published on Sunday, the Globe and Mail declared separated bike lanes the way forward for Toronto's long-suffering cycling community, pointing to Montreal's dedicated lanes as an avenue this city should be readily exploring. The 514 has a network of relatively quiet secondary streets with bike-only lanes that encourage and protect people who chose to ride to work or play. Toronto, on the other hand, does not.
Painted bike lanes are okay, so the argument goes, but they don't shield cyclists from fast moving traffic as well as those with a raised curb or other means of separation, and that's often enough to discourage new riders from climbing in the saddle. In some cases, a bike in the garage is a car on the road, and that means more traffic, more pollution and longer commute times for other road users.
The question is where do we put them. Not everyone is a fan of the current plan, especially given that the city actually experienced a net reduction in bikes lanes in 2011.
In another editorial earlier this month, Spacing magazine's Dylan Reid suggested that separated lanes are better suited to fast-moving routes like Richmond and Adelaide due to of the increased risk of a high-speed collision. Reid says lanes like those coming to Sherbourne Street, shown above, would be better served elsewhere because of the relatively slow pace of traffic. This makes sense.
So how might the city move forward? Despite the Globe's suggestion, it could be quite difficult to create a proper network of interconnected dedicated bike lanes on minor streets in Toronto on account of their generally short length. Should we proceed with dedicated lanes on busier routes, then it's all the more important to create a bonafide network that allows cyclists to feel protect as they navigate the city. In the absence of that, perhaps an increase in painted bike lanes would be more friendly to cyclists overall?
You gave us your thoughts on Twitter this morning. Add your wisdom to the comment thread below.
Photo: "Bike Lane" by Kiril Strax in the blogTO Flickr pool.
Discussion
63 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
How would turning work from a bike lane on a 4 lane - one way street like Richmond or Adelaide (i.e. turning left while on Adelaide) if it was a separate bike lane area?
2) Use alternatives like:
Bathurst Street from Bloor to King, you can use Palmerston (Tecumseth for Queen-King part).
Funny how the cyclist community is going on about blitz on cars yet they ignore the bad cyclists. There should be a blitz on ALL road users.
How about a blitz on cyclists who ignore stop signs?
How about a blitz on cyclists who ignore open streetcar doors?
How about a blitz on cyclists who ignore direction of road and go the oppposite direction on a one way road?
How about a blitz on cyclists who ignore pedestrians and go on sidewalks?
How about a blitz on cyclists and drivers who ignore stop signs?
How about a blitz on cyclists and drivers who ignore open streetcar doors?
How about a blitz on cyclists and drivers who ignore direction of road and go the oppposite direction on a one way road?
How about a blitz on cyclists and SUV drivers who ignore pedestrians and go on sidewalks?
Sounds good to me! As a cyclist I first watch out for motorized vehicles.... then I look out for other cyclists! :-)
Pedestrians who start crossing with 5 seconds left on the countdown thinking they can "make it". They aren't suppose to start crossing. Sure, I can see if there is no traffic around but when there is a line of 5 cars waiting to turn, have a bit of respect and don't cross especially since it isn't your right to cross. (rules say to cross only when the white "walk" signal shows).
trust me, the first one or two times you may feel nervous but the more you bike, the more confident you will become and will soon realise that there really is no great danger to cycling as long as you follow the law, dont be unpredictable, and assert yourself.
its fun!
How about a blitz on drivers who ignore red lights?
How about a blitz on drivers who don't signal turns or signal AS THEY'RE TURNING?
How about a blitz on drivers who turn left from the right lane?
How about a blitz on drivers who are looking down at the f**king cell phones in the middle of traffic?
There are a lot of cyclists who ignore rules, but there are just as many drivers. And cars are far more dangerous than bikes.
In Berlin, the lanes are basically on the sidewalks, so there's room to pass, as long as you're looking out for pedestrians (which is a little scary). But they have a lot more space there.
In Vienna, there are lots of completely separate lanes where they'll have both directions side by side, much like our Martin Goodman trail but a bit skinnier. That's fine too because you can pass when there's no oncoming traffic. But again, I don't think we have the space for that.
We need more one way streets with proper computer controlled lights so that traffic actually moves
And a network of proper bikelanes should be built but with some cavets: 1. No bike lanes on major streets, Jarvis was a mistake key north-south automobile road. Sherborne less traffic well designed. 2. Biking should be illegal on non-bikelane streets.
It's really not that hard. Both sides can win.
On this note, it always pisses me off when I see the "improvements" they did along Bloor. Flower beds and big sidewalks are nice, but they could have spared a few feet for a bike lane.
Before that can be answered, we need to address the glaring elephant in the room, which is the incontrovertable fact that bike lane proponants seem incapable of accepting that cars are here to stay. In the past 35 years cost of gas has gone from 37 cents a GALLON to $1.20 a litre! Insurance has also skyrocketed. And taxes! And parking fees! And repair bills! All have gone through the roof. Yet, cars are more popular than ever! In the next 20 years we are going to see a dramatic shift to economical, smart, fuel efficient vehicles that no longer polute our air. More people will be buying cars than ever before. We have to face up to this fact first, before we can have a discussion about bike lanes.
So where do bike lanes NOT belong?
On major arteries in and out of the city, and also on minor artieries, like Jarvis, Eastern Ave, University and so on. Basically, on streets that move a high volumne of cars during rush hours from one part of the city to another.
Also, any street those nutjobs at City Hall plan to put light rail transit, like Eglinton. The LRTs will screw up traffic enough without adding bike lanes. You want bike lanes on those streets, then build subways, as the voters requested at the polls.
But other than that, the rest of the streets are pretty fair game, along with parks and hydro corridors.
Remember, though, that cars are not a trend, they are here to stay. We need to embrace this fact and ensure we do all we can as a city to manage congestion. Yes, there's room for bike lanes, but only on certain streets.
Those who think you can force people out of their cars by screwing up traffic or by putting more 40-foot petri dishes on the road are sadly mistaken.
And the man at the back said
Everyone attack and it turned into a ballroom blitz
And the girl in the corner said
Boy, I wanna warn ya, it'll turn into a ballroom blitz
In the Nederlands eventual automobile drivers are taught to open their doors using the hand furthest from the door. For instance, driver opens door with right hand- this makes you turn to look over your left shoulder and also aides in a cyclist not receiving the 'door prize'.
I strongly feel obtaining a drivers license in Ontario should cost over $1500 and have a strick test. I also feel cyclists need to learn correct signaling and obey traffic rules, don't bike on side walks, don't run lights and stops signs.
No e-bikes (which are motorized) allowed in bike lanes or sidewalks. E-bikes should require drivers license, and testing and share the road with scooters, motorcycles and cars.
That said, if a real cycling infrastructure existed perhaps many of the issues between cars and cyclists wouldn't exist.
Separate lanes with curbs, painted, reflective- are an incredible solution to some issues. On shorter streets, add street bumps or posts to separate cars, buses, etc., from cycle routes.
Separate bicycle signals at intersections, as well as separate pedestrian signals.
Separate bike lane from TTC path: make the bike lane continue around bus shelter or bus stop rather than in direct line with it.
More people will commute via bicycle once they feel safe. Thus contributing greatly to air quality, outlook, fitness, and community.
Montreal experiences actual bicycle traffic jams, and I saw the number of cyclists rise dramatically over the years I lived there. They are definitely doing something right. Cycling there feels incredibly easy and safe.
I would like to add that whenever I see this conversation come up in Toronto the default response (there are a few above) is *grumble grumble, what about cyclists who break the rules!*. Sigh. I don't know why this non-response to the issue at hand is so popular here, but again, all I can say is that in Montreal EVERYONE breaks the rules all the time and you know what? Far fewer collisions there than here. Cyclists who break the rules and cyclists having a safe place to ride are not topics in the same conversation, but bringing up the former is an efficient way to discount the latter.
As for where to put them in Toronto, major arterial streets are too busy and too narrow to install the lanes properly, so I vote for the back streets and minor arterials. But enough whining, just get it done, Toronto.
Montreal removes many of its bike lanes in the winter (the ones that are separated with green pilons). The ones that are separated with curbs are on major arteries, not side streets, and go all year for the few hardcore people who can handle biking in the snow (definitely not me!)
p.s. totally agree with all the people who suggest removing street parking on the busiest arteries.
Yes, cars are here to stay. However, so are the giant buildings downtown, as are the woefully tiny streets. More than that, the population of the downtown core is expanding, and so are the businesses. More and more people are moving to the GTA and working downtown, and thus more and more people need to get in and out of the city.
The road system was built in the 1950s to accommodate around 10% of the population that we expect to be living in the GTA in the next few decades.
How do you expect these people to get in and out of the city?
If we knock down buildings to make more roads, there won't be a city.
The only way to move the population is to wean people off their cars by providing alternative transport, such as bicycles and public transit.
London, England has managed it beautifully. By providing both bicycle and bus only lanes, along with parking on the outskirts of the city, they have made moving large numbers of people feasible. We should take a page out of their book.
That said, separated bike lanes are gonna be GREAT. They'll get new people out on bikes, and new cyclists are timid.
The more people on bikes in Toronto, the better.
Eventually, there'll be congestion and bike traffic jams in the separated lanes, and then some of them will spill over onto the streets... WHERE THEY BELONG.
Traffic on Sherbourne and Wellesley is fast and busy enough to justify separated lanes. Dylan is using his own judgement and not that of the majority of people, many of whom are too timid to ride even on those streets because of car traffic.
@Trolls: Maybe we should apply the same standards to car drivers: you don't get roads until every car driver obeys all the laws. All you speeding drivers, running yellows and scaring pedestrians: up yours!
I think separated lanes (curbed or using parked cars as the barrier) could go on some streets that are wide to begin with (University), have unnecessarily wide sidewalks that bike lanes could be cut into (Queen), or which currently allow useless on-street parking that limits traffic flow (taxis parked endlessly on King). Another factor would be using streets that have little or no surface transit (University again, Front, Wellington).
How about a blintz on cyclists and drivers who ignore stop signs?
How about a blintz on cyclists and drivers who ignore open streetcar doors?
How about a blintz on cyclists and drivers who ignore direction of road and go the oppposite direction on a one way road?
How about a blintz on cyclists and SUV drivers who ignore pedestrians and go on sidewalks?
There I fixed it for you.
Firstly, license cyclists and anchor it to their driver's license, if they have one. Now:
1. Pass a law forcing cyclists to carry a credit card with a min. $1,500 limit.
2. Put two cops at each of the 20 busiest downtown intersections, with wireless, handheld credit card payment machine.
3. Stop every cyclist who breaks a law and fine them on the spot, and make them pay on the spot with their credit card.
4. The cost of the fines can vary, but no fine should be less than $150.00
5. If the cyclist disagrees, he/she can fight it in court and if they win they get their money back.
6. Use the millions of dollar you'd make from this each month (since you can't stand more than five minutes at any intersection in the city without seeing cyclists ignoring the laws of the road) to pay off our debt, fund Wannabe Mayor Stintz's OneCity plan, and build new bike lanes on secondary routes downtown.
There, problem solves. Next!