apparently the guy on the left started the petition and organized the open house where people called for cyclists on bloor to be run over for using the bike lanes. and go figure, the email address he is using as a public figure and motorist advocate belongs to a real estate holding company: http://www.twowheeledpolitics.ca/2024/03/calling-out-etobicoke-opponents-on-bloor.html
What's really frustrating is that many opponents of bike lanes I've encountered are actually cyclists (including Cody!), but they're recreational cyclists. These are the sorts of people who will load their bike on a rack and drive an hour out of the city to a trailhead for a ride through a forest before they'll ever consider starting and ending a trip at their front door yet they feel their voice is more important than the people who actually ride in the city to go places and do things.
Recreational cyclists tend to believe that [utility cyclists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling) don't exist. Not all but quite a lot of them. It's such a common phenomenon to see comments like "I'm a cyclist but I don't support bike lanes". At first I thought they were lying until I realized that not every cyclist does utility. Then you also got the [vehicular cyclists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling) who think that safety of cyclists is bound to personal responsibility as opposed to infrastructure (see #Criticism section for that page).
I think that's a big part of why they don't think that bike lanes can reduce traffic. They simply cannot fathom that people use bicycles to travel from point A to point B; they see it as an intrusion of hobbyists into a space that should be reserved for necessary transportation.
> they see it as an intrusion of hobbyists into a space that should be reserved for necessary transportation.
They are completely wrong and I don't blame them. It's largely a problem with our culture and tradition. Biking was never really marketed towards anything but exercise. By marketed I mean the stereotype of your average cyclist. However, the mindset is changing, albeit slowly. We're seeing more people make utility cycling trips thanks to better bike lanes.
Biking as a means of transportation saw a huge upswing in the '70s because of the oil crisis. It was during this era that Toronto staff first proposed a Bloor-Danforth cycle track, but it was also during this era that John Forester was peddling (heh) vehicular cycling and most governments were drawn by the allure of simply pretending bicycles were small cars instead of spending money building cycling infrastructure.
I used to see things from the 'vehicular cyclist' point of view when I was younger, partially because I'd been riding for utility since I was a teenager and all the way through adulthood. It was only after I thought about things for a while that I realised that not many people had the kinds of experience that I did as a cyclist and if we want to encourage more people to ride more often, it had to be with infrastructure that was safer than riding unprotected in traffic lanes.
I am a vehicular cyclist, but as you noted, I recognize that my comfort and confidence on a bike is unique to myself and if we expect more people to pick up bikes and see cycling as a viable alternative to transportation, they need safer infrastructure. Basically the safer the infrastructure, the lower the floor of person who will be willing to bike. I might be comfortable biking in mixed traffic but I know that my experience is not universal.
As a utility cyclist, I have a lot of respect for vehicle riders, but I’ll stick to a bike lane if I have one. On side streets sure, and there are bike lanes that are so messed up I’ll take my chances with the cars, but I don’t like it.
If cars want bikes like me out of their way, repair the bike lanes, make more, and make it easier for me to stay on side streets instead of redirecting all traffic to the main arteries.
I think you really need to define “safety”.
The provision of bike lanes thus far, has led to complacency for cyclists, advocates, and enforcement. There doesn’t seem to be any training, PSAs, or enforcement of the rules of the road. There’s no mandatory training even though they are considered a vehicle, and now they feel “safe” but with no knowledge (or respect) for the rules, they are a danger to themselves and others.
They’re not “safe”, they’re protected. Even then, the cyclists in the bike lane are not protected from motorized bikes and scooters which are also a hazard to pedestrians and motorists. To actually make them safe, they need to be educated.
Put the baby gate up but also teach the child to use stairs. Otherwise, they’re a danger to themselves and others.
They downvoted me for suggesting that the idaho stop will just lead to more collisions if cyclists arent educated on when and where its appropriate. Dont need 13 year old Johnny running a blind intersection and getting hit. Cant give this sort of legal power to everyone even if you personally are okay with it.
It’s things like riding the wrong way down a one way street where there’s no stop sign at the end so they just ride straight into traffic without thinking. Whose fault is that? The cyclist who’s been made to feel “safe”, or the motorist who was following the HTA.
My point is, the advocates have installed bike lanes to “protect” cyclists but without anyone following rules no one is “safe”.
https://www.tcat.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Mapping-Cycling-Behaviour-in-Toronto.pdf
Look at (2.1.4)
74% of cyclists in Toronto have a drivers license
You're not doing them any favours if they think they are safe but they aren't... They probably won't get hurt - but all it takes is one good scare to a cyclist who is in over their head, and they likely quit for good .You need basic skills to swim in the deep end, and bike lanes don't cut it
This fits with the stereotype of people online stating "I'm an avid cyclist but..." followed by something bananas like "nobody uses a bike to get groceries" or "if you can't protect yourself you shouldn't be on the road" or "I don't understand why bikes need road space when they can just cycle around a track."
I was a vehicular cyclists for a long time. I felt like bike lanes were for the weak and made you soft. I was also really indifferent to my own well-being
Huh? I am a vehicular cyclist who commutes to work and rides for recreation on the weekend . Vehicular cycling IS utilitarian cycling . You need skills to do both, Unfortunately in this city few cyclists can be bothered - they let the bike lane do the thinking for them - and often the results are not pleasant.
I'm not judging you for being a vehicular cyclist that bikes for recreation or bikes on a dangerous road. I just don't like how your comments generally tend to advocate for people to do the same. While you're correct that knowing how to navigate a road is important, infrastructure is significantly more important when it comes to the safety of individuals. I suggest you watch this [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z31YZj1kwiA).
Also road cyclists, especially those who live in the suburbs and still drive everywhere for everything. I know people like this, and they generally think that people don't want to use a bike for any practical purpose, partly because all of their neighbours are likely also drivers.
They only want the odd painted bike lane for their own rides, and this is frustrating.
No we mean cyclists
I think you might want to open a dictionary and look at what cyclist means
And also maybe actually go outside instead of your dungeon so you can see there are so many more regular bikes than e-bikes.
And you NEVER hear them complain about one less lane on main artery streets due to parking on the right lane. But the minute a bike lane taking less width (typically, unless there’s buffer room which I do prefer) then suddenly OMG I CAN’T DRIVE ANYWHERE ANYMORE WITH THE CONGESTION (god forbid I plan ahead for the extra 5-15 extra mins).
Parked cars are never an issue for congestion apparently.
i don't buy any of it tbh. i think bike lanes and cyclists are this weird proximate for what they think are lefty/pinko lifestyles and there's this kneejerk and inextricable hatred they have as a result.
every argument they throw at this is a boogeyman, total bullshit or easily upended by data.
where do you think the hatred for bikes comes from? it definitely seems aligned with populist/right wing politics in general in Canada, but i don't really get why
Auto lobbying? IDK. it does general fit with the vibe of clueless suburbanite in a mega-cab pickup frustrated by everyone else doing exactly what they're doing.
Because a long time ago the Car lobby of north america correlated ones right to freedom of movement is tied to car ownership, when advocating for more highways and car infrastructure to be built at the expense of public transport. The narrative sold was a government that wants to invest in public transport is a government that wants infringe on its citizens freedom of movement by disincentivising private vehicle ownership. As if a couple trains and pedestrian only traffic districts is some how preventing people from owning cars.
This narrative still holds strong today when you hear pundits yell conspiracy theories about 15 minute cities when discussions surrounding zoning laws is brought up.
Cycling advocates link cycling and bike lanes to addressing climate change, and populist right wing politics is anti anything that's climate change related.
Honestly, if they complain so much about traffic, they need to look at on-street parking instead. It serves way fewer people that even a live traffic lane. What is it? 20 cars per block as a sitting duck?
Cheap on street parking needs to go die a fiery death. Major intersections are reduced to one lane each way, and for what? How much does a single parked car really move the needle for businesses on that block?
Amsterdam comparison is getting tiresome:
https://acme.com/same_scale/#43.69363,-79.41510,52.37041,4.89707,13,M,M
I can guarantee you no tourist has been outside of the ring road, which is similar in size to the core of Toronto.
In the map above, the Bloor St bike lanes are not even shown because they are so far out from the core.
A better comparison is Munich (where I lived for 2 years). 1.5M people, gets snow every winter (-20 in winter, +30 in summer), industrial areas on the outskirts of the city....and yet amazeballs public transit (trams, subways, surface rail, long distance rail), separated bike lanes everywhere, and a pedestrianized core. Not as good for bikes as the Netherlands, but I still didn't need a car while living there (in the suburbs).
It's also the headquarters of BMW and it's just down the road from the Audi headquarters in case anyone thinks it's not a car town. Lots of people drive. And yet they still build bike infrastructure and public transit.
When I visited Amsterdam I stayed in a suburb well outside of the central touristy ring area and easily biked back and forth to the city centre through parks and on bike lanes, probably at least 7 or 8km, maybe a 20ish minute bike ride. Not sure what you're on about.
what snow are you talking about? the 1-2 cm that fall every other months and are gone a day or two later here in Toronto?
I've seen about the same in the Netherlands.
To be honest, I think these iterations of bikes are pretty ugly, especially with the big flexi posts and (on lanes like these) all the chicanes to get around the parking spots. It's such an afterthought and looks like crap. But yeah, no worse than a line of parked cars.
If we are serious about building infrastructure then build them properly, fully segregated and off the road. Build out the sidewalks, add a bike lane, then put the curb and road. Hopefully one day...
It's a running theme: One of the bigger opponents of the Danforth bike lanes is also a bar owner. He's argued that it's too dangerous for his patrons to walk the ~200m to a nearby Green P lot or ~100m to the subway.
This is bad faith engagement at worst and entitlement at best, casting doubt on the data collected by the city, and insisting automobile drivers be of the utmost priority. There is ample research demonstrating that drivers cause congestion - period.
To insist we prioritize driving is to insist on a low-efficiency subsidy for those who drive. *It is automobile socialism*. These very same people would strongly object to free TTC use, calling it a handout, whereas automobile infrastructure costs this city immensely.
Again, young people and progressives: VOTE. Turnout. Sign petitions. Don't allow those engaging in bad faith and misguided entitlement to *make decisions for you*. We'd be a force if we turned out like these people do.
This. Cars cause traffic. There’s only so much road and we can’t make it bigger. Every time someone goes off about bike lanes i wonder, what are they blaming the bumper to bumper on the 401 or DVP on? The Gardiner is at a standstill because of essential maintenance, we can’t have miles of road infrastructure that will never need work.
There’s too many cars trying to fit into too small a space and new roads are not magically going to appear.
Im in midtown. The fact that I can bike all the way to king west faster than transit and driving while encountering traffic says enough.
People don’t understand induced demand and how counter intuitive it is that building wider roads doesn’t actually fix traffic
It's just a cost issue. Nobody should be surprised that the city is suddenly building a lot of bike infrastructure, because city council _loves_ solving problems with the most cost-effective solution.
Building more roads requires a lot of space. Building more subway and streetcar routes requires a lot of time and money. Adding more buses requires a lot of labour (which is expensive in Toronto). Bike infrastructure is extremely easy and cheap by comparison.
> Again, young people and progressives: VOTE.
Who should I vote for when every party (that are actually contenders) in my riding are against bike lanes?
That depends on which riding you're in. What's up? Where you at? Also, bike lanes largely come down to city council, so you can look for your bike lane lovin' city council candidate to support.
You and me both. But if we keep on sending that support, the party knows that there IS support and that we DO care and that we want and need the change they are trying to make happen (from your probably much older neighbour who still cares).
I wish that was the answer, but speaking as a Gen-Xer, there's more than enough of us with stupid ideas in our stupid heads to replace the dying Boomers.
Less and less every generation and fewer and fewer people who are stuck on this deranged idea of ripping down the open highway in your drop top mustang on the way to see your best gal and drive to your grandparents fancy $20,000 house for a barbecue in the giant backyard.
I'm not convinced it wont get better. Not yet.
I've met Baker several times and he seems like a pleasant person. He's really active in the community and is very responsive. But goddamn, what the hell is up with his politics? Between the zombie-walking law, going after Chow, and this wild obsession with a municipal infrastructure issue that's not even in his goddamn riding, I genuinely do not believe that he is even close to representing my interests.
Don't get me started on Surma. What a disaster she is.
I'll say positive things about Dan McLean, our TDSB trustee. He actually gives a shit about public education.
I'd just keep voting NDP, then. Even if to push certain policies, have the Liberals adopt them, and continually elect a nobody like Yvan Baker. Ridings are subject to boundary changes, and policies and candidates are subject to change as well. You're vote is not wasted. You're contributing to what *could* be an incremental change toward progressive policy.
Overall I agree with your message but feel the need to correct the sentiment that “socialism is when the government does stuff”. Socialism is an entire economic and political system in which the working class owns and exerts control over the means of production.
Thank you for the correction! Indeed, I was being rather facetious. I do appreciate, though, that you want to ensure we not muddle the discourse with misinformation. In the future I'll perhaps not be so fast and loose with my rhetoric. ;)
+1.
"The government is governing" is what happens in countries that function. They're welcome to head over to the libertarian paradises of Sudan and Haiti if they'd like less of that.
I am thankful that it sounds like the city is going to jam this through. If the deal is that we don't get a car brained doink, and instead we have to deal with someone who is going to waste our money on Sankofa square but give us bike lanes in exchange, I don't hate it tbh.
>“Never in my life have I seen something create such a backlash and an uproar,” said owner Sam Pappas, who, like many other local business owners, thinks the lanes are ugly, and make it difficult for local customers and those outside the neighbourhood to visit.
There is ample parking west of Montgomery at the Green P lot, and a short walk to his establishment, same to the east at Willington Road if no street parking is available. There is still parking along Birchview which is just north of Bloor too, and that street runs behind his establishment.
To say it is difficult for anyone to visit is quite a stretch because all of that parking was available before the bike lane went in.
From the King St transit priority lanes to the Bloor St bike lane, again and again we would discover than the business owners complaining about bikes lanes were really concerned about losing their own ability to park directly in front of their business every morning.
From Tom Riley Park to Prince Edward, there are literally HUNDREDS of Green P parking spots within a one-block walk of Bloor Street. It's incredibly easy to park on that part of Bloor. This is all available on the Green P website. They didn't remove much in the way of on-street parking at all.
As someone who drives through the neighbourhood periodically, it's only *really* busy at rush hour, and even then, it adds maybe two minutes to my journey. Not unnoticeable, but not a dealbreaker. It's much easier to visit the neighbourhood on a bike anyway. My biggest issue is that the bike lane network doesn't go far enough. It needs to extend N-S, where a ton of people live. I know that's on the plan, but it would be *sooooooooooo simple* to put separated lanes on Kipling between Lakeshore and Eglinton.
I’m a driver who frequently parks where there are separated bikes lanes. On average it’s not any more difficult or easier than parking on any other street parking. I prefer cyclists have a lane.
And some of these times it’s like 5:30 or 6 pm on a main road. Also ducking down onto a side street is often an easy alternative
I think some drivers insist on always being able to park right outside a shop. Oh no, walk for 2-5 minutes? The horror.
This also completely ignores the fact that every study has shown that by adding bike lanes and reducing on street parking has actually been a huge positive for local businesses both in terms of number of patrons and money spent. This guy is complaining on his feelings when the facts show it will benefit him.
Correct. Sometimes him and his posse take the side streets and go right through the middle. The very definition of obnoxious cyclists who give the rest of us a bad name.
This type of person is a stereotypical [vehicular cyclist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling). He likely only bikes for recreation and never for [utility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling). It's a very common phenomenon that people like him will vote against bike lanes.
A quote taken from the Wikipedia page to prove this theory:
> The movement surrounding vehicular cycling has also been criticized for its effect on bicycle advocacy in general. In Pedaling Revolution, Jeff Mapes states that Forester **"fought bike lanes, European-style cycletracks, and just about any form of traffic calming", and "saw nothing wrong with sprawl and an auto-dependent lifestyle."[17]** Zack Furness is highly critical of vehicular cyclists in One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility, arguing that their criticism of 'political' cyclists "totally ignores all the relevant socioeconomic, physical, material, and cultural factors that influence—and in most cases dictate—everyday transportation choices."[18] Critical Mass co-founder Chris Carlsson describes vehicular cycling as a naïve, polarizing "ideology" that "essentially advocates bicyclists should strive to behave like cars on the streets of America."[19] **The makeup of vehicular cycling advocates as a group in the United States was criticized in the 1990s for being typically club cyclists that are well educated, upper-middle income or wealthy, suburban, and white, representing a social and economic elite that are able to dominate public discussions of cycle planning issues.[20]** Vehicular cyclists have also been disproportionately male. In the US, males make up 88% of total cyclist fatalities.[21]
People don’t bike because they’re afraid of drivers in cars and don’t realize how awesome it is to get around by bike. I cycle all year round for work, play, criminal misdeeds. It’s great and I try to get people to join in. But a constant refrain I hear is “but the drivers are crazy and there’s no bike infrastructure!”
Which saddens me. Because while yes there remain many shitty drivers, the bike infrastructure has GREATLY improved since I moved here in 2016. Admittedly I’m downtown/Leslieville but I can plan most of my trips with like 80% bike lane coverage these days.
Until they start building biking infrastructure where cyclists don't share the road with cars/trucks (ala Copenhagen) and Canada actually raises the bar considerably when it comes to handing out driver's licences, I'll stick with public transportation when travelling in the heart of the city.
It’s gotten so much better though! I think you’d be surprised.
Adelaide/Richmond/University/Bloor/College all have physically separated lanes which are being improved over time.
Shuter is an excellent route east of Yonge and connects to Dundas via River which has lanes East of Parliament.
Totally agree. I think a lot of peoples views on cycling in Toronto are outdated. If you haven't biked downtown within the last year or so, it's time to try it again. It's improving a lot, and very quickly. It's absolutely night and day to how it was pre-COVID. It's like a totally different city as a cyclist.
Even if you are! I’ve biked to many work events/conferences downtown using them. I tend to get less messy with them because they have chain guards and solid fenders that protect from any grime. Maybe not idea for lunch at the height of summer but otherwise, great! The e-bikes are especially great if you’re worried about being sweaty.
It's been improving in places, but the problem I've found is that there's just no infrastructure connecting the places I need to go. If I were to ride to work from my place in Midtown, I would have to weave and wind around the city to stay on bike lanes. And the quality of the lanes can vary greatly, and sometimes just don't exist if there's construction happening.
The heart of the city is the safest area to cycle in, its the suburbs where you really face danger. But I don't blame anyone for not feeling safe enough on the roads. The fact we have a bike share program that is so popular that it expands every year, but don't provide safe facilities for the users is shocking. The demand is there, time to build it out.
The refrain I hear from other cyclists I know is "I don't want my bike to be stolen or vandalized."
I have no hesitation riding from North-east East York to the core and west, but I wouldn't leave my bike locked outside downtown for hours while I was at work.
Already had a bike stolen from the racks outside Woodbine Station, so I can't recommend using a bike for last mile from the subway either.
Infrastructure has improved, and I hope that will continue - especially outside the core. But legitimate fear of bike theft or vandalism is going to remain an obstacle for a lot of cyclists who might otherwise be interested.
My own bike is an upright 3i, so I thought Bikeshare would work for me, but it didn't.
Nearest station is 700m in the wrong direction - and I'm closer to it than most people in my neighbourhood.
I need to carry more than that silly little bracket on the front will hold and the front end of those is already dead heavy. (Why don't Bikeshare bikes have rear racks?) Just not a backpack person. Also I don't ride without a helmet, and I don't want to tote a helmet just in case Bikeshare works out one way.
My own bike I know is in good repair and the gearing is normal and correct. I'm riding on an arterial road in the dark (part of the year) with heavy trucks hurtling past at best available speed. My own bike is just safer to use in these conditions.
Yeah I fully understand that. When I first moved to TO my bike was stolen within 3 weeks because I left it locked up to a shitty fence.
I don’t want to say it’s a “overblown” concern, because it’s totally valid. But honestly, I think a solid lock and a high traffic lock up location is a solid deterrent I find. It’s mostly a crime of opportunity. (Maybe lock it up to a nicer looking bike with a worse lock….)
But like someone else mentioned, BikeShare is amazing for that concern (for people who live within the ever expanding radius).
Lock it up next to a nicer looking bike??? So throw another cyclist under the bus is your best suggestion? Please.
A lot of bike thieves will take anything they can get - and with an angle grinder that's pretty much everything. They flip them for a few dollars they use to appease whatever demons they struggle with. I hope your luck holds. I rely on my bike for everything, so I can't afford to be so trusting.
My first bike got stolen because the rack got cut. My current bike has two locks: An Abus U-lock and a Kryptonite heavy chain. Yes I carry almost 4kg of locks. They haven't got it yet, but they get frustrated and pull hard or kick the bike, slashed the saddle and the tires. This is on the Danforth, so yes, a high traffic location. I don't expect passersby to intervene. Their own safety comes first and I respect that.
My suggestion would be to do more to incentivize employers to provide secure indoor parking for cyclist employees. Businesses are always hungry for positive recognition. Something as simple as the city giving them recognition for doing that could bring results.
Also give people living in apartments the right to bring their bikes into their units if they choose. Theft from underground parking and apartment storage is also a known issue.
> In the grid of basically Islington/Kipling to the west, call it Woodbine to the east, the water to the south and maybe Lawrence or York Mills to the north, it's quicker to bike pretty much any time of the year, pretty much anywhere you want to go.
During rush hour, Royal York between Bloor and Queensway is a TOTAL NIGHTMARE because of all the drivers taking their kids to school. The buses are stuck in traffic and can't move around, but the cyclists in the bike lanes? FLYING BY.
Once you get off the arterials, riding a bike is totally speedy out in Etobicoke. The problem is that the arterials connect a LOT of places, and many of them are demonstrably faster than cycling because they're basically highways. If you live in Central Etobicoke, like Kipling/Eglinton, you'll never get to Sherway even remotely faster on a bike than in a car. If Etobicoke had more amenities scattered throughout communities, rather than massive hubs in a select few locations, it would be much easier to live with just bikes.
Honestly the main reason I don't cycle as a means of transportation is because I'm too chicken shit to leave my bike locked up outside unattended for more than 2 minutes.
Lack of contiguous infrastructure also doesn't help but tbf there is a lot of stuff I can reach reasonably safely from my home by bicycle.
It's mainly fear of theft that limits me to recreational riding, where the bike never leaves my side.
> You'll never theft-proof your bike.
Yea, that along with it being rampant is the problem. Cops are literally telling us to just let thieves just have our cars, what chance does my bike stand against one of the pettiest forms of petty crime?
I'd have to get a beater, a lock that costs as much or more than the beater, and then scuff the shit out of it, and even then it could still get stolen at which point I'm out several hundred bucks for nothing, worse if they cut the lock.
I'd rather walk, drive to Walmart, or order online to get stuff. I wish I could cycle as I could go further and get more stuff than I could walking without having to deal with the cost/time/annoyance of finding parking, but this is the city we live in.
It clearly depends on the neighborhood, but this idea that people are walking around with battery powered angle grinders is a little more prevalent than reality.
Bike theft is a crime of opportunity. If you leave a nice looking bike out in the open for hours, it's going to be at some risk. Contrary to what most people seem to think, it doesn't look like your bike is going to vanish during the 30 minutes you're in a Walmart unless you've left it unlocked in a high traffic area.
Sure, someone can slice through a D lock with said angle grinder in about 15 minutes. But that's 15 minutes with a tool shrieking away and sparks flying everywhere. It's going to get some attention.
Also bikeshare exists. Sure, they're far from amazing, but it exists.
This is strange to me. I live downtown and I've never had a problem, as long as I have a good lock and I lock my front tire with a cable. My wife has had someone take her seat a few times. Like maybe 3 times over the past 20 years.
I used to have to leave my bike locked outside all the time, before I moved somewhere with a bike storage room. Actually, my wife's bike was once stolen out of the storage room, but neither of our bikes were taken when they had to be locked outside.
Yea, there's a chance that someone will try to steal your bike or something off of your bike, but based on a few decades of experience, I would never use that as a reason not to bike.
Indeed. I wouldn't leave my bike unattended at a ring lock overnight but have no problem during the day. Been cycling in Toronto since 2007 pretty much year-round and the only time it was stolen was from my backyard in Parkdale when I got lazy and didn't lock it back there. Been leaving it outside the office for years without issue. My current bike isn't top of the line but a decent single speed (Fuji Feather) and I have a good quality lock plus no quick release components.
Probably an unpopular opinion but when I chatted with the owner of a bike store he opined that a decent percentage of bikes stolen simply aren't locked up properly. Thieves will always go for the easy target and I've seen bikes accidentally locked to nothing on numerous occasions - done it myself in the past but luckily nobody noticed.
> we now have bikes where you push a button, and you go
Came for this comment. We are literally witnessing the birth of the micro-digitization of transportation solutions via eBikes and eScooters. The paradigm has shifted more than people realize. Bike lanes, in the last 5 years, have become ultra-valuable. Sure some of these arguments may have had some merit years ago, but anyone spouting them off now is a complete dinosaur.
Someone should buy this guy an eBike and an eScooter.
Mostly I really don’t like the traffic and get quite nervous. Never drove either, I’m not cut out for it I think. I’m a lifelong subway/pedestrian type.
>In the grid of basically Islington/Kipling to the west, call it Woodbine to the east, the water to the south and maybe Lawrence or York Mills to the north, it's quicker to bike pretty much any time of the year, pretty much anywhere you want to go.
I love this take. Hillarious.
For me:
Kingston road and then danforth is a death trap for cycling
Especially at night when motorist ignore things like red lights and checking blind spots and speed limits and the road becomes the Authobahn
It gets dark by 5 in fall. I just can’t be biking home in the dark on that street
It’s way faster cycling into downtown than the alternatives from the east end as well. For some reason theres a gap in the bike lanes though, there’s no link from Dundas lanes to Gerrard lanes, which I have no doubt discourages potential riders. Very frustrating, those little connectivity gaps are everywhere.
Honestly, because cycling is inconvenient if you need to bring anything with you and limits the distance you can travel. I can't bring my work kit, my hobby items, prepared food for an event or anything bigger than 10-15lbs on a bicycle and I certainly can't use a bike to visit friends and family outside of the city. I also don't want to get soaked in the rain or sweaty and tired in the heat.
Cars are more comfortable, practical and convenient. People aren't going to just magically decide to start riding bicycles more because there's more infrastructure. Everyone who wants to ride a bike is already riding one.
I like riding a bicycle as a fun activity, but using one as your main mode of transportation sucks hard unless your entire life is contained in a small area and you never carry anything bigger than a backpack.
>Cars are more ... practical
Except they manifestly aren't in a big city. There aren't enough roads for everyone to have a car and drive everywhere (and park). Driving becomes impractical when you pass a certain level of density.
Cycling as a form of commute is not meant to ENTIRELY replace cars. Your examples make sense that cycling would not be viable. However, we often underestimate how many cycle-able trips we can actually make. For example, a North American [study](https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1230-march-21-2022-more-half-all-daily-trips-were-less-three-miles-2021) has shown that 50% of the trips by a car are less than 5 km long. I'm sure you can convert a good portion of those into cycling trips provided we have infrastructure. Also, regarding your concern about heat/sweat, luckily for you, this isn't 1984. This is 2024 where we have electric bikes that give us the pedal assist for when we're tired. Keep that in mind next time you choose a new commuter bike.
You're right that cars are comfortable and have way more potential tasks. But a lot of people do not like driving because it's not good for your [personal health](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEEWqddlYQw). But we choose to drive because our transit and biking infrastructure are below average for a large city. You shouldn't expect people to magically start riding a bike the moment new bike lanes open. That's like saying that if you open a new coffee shop, it'll be packed with customers right away. Actually, scratch that. A [Bloor West study](https://old.reddit.com/r/torontobiking/comments/1d2yybl/new_bloor_bike_counts_from_tcbc/) (done by volunteers albeit so take for grain of salt), has shown that cycling numbers in that stretch have actually grown in less than a year since installation. That's despite the fact that that it's only a few km and doesn't have many north-south connections.
That last paragraph shows how little you understand about [utility cycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling). You think cycling is only for recreation and fun. Unfortunately, that's wrong but I don't blame you because that was traditionally the purpose of cycling in North America. Times are changing and more people are using their bikes (even e-bikes) for doing daily tasks. It'll only continue growing as more bike lanes are built. Also, we really underestimate how many trips are fairly short and don't carry much weight.
> This is 2024 where we have electric bikes that give us the pedal assist for when we're tired. Keep that in mind next time you choose a new commuter bike.
I just wanted to jump in and say that if you've never used an electric bike, they're really neat and really change the physical approach to cycling.
I am in, at best, mediocre shape. I rented one of the City's ebikes from around Islington Station and rode it to Bay/Queen. It took me about 43 minutes, including an awkward walk down a pedestrian area. By the time I got to the bike station, I was relaxed, comfortable, not overheating and not really sweating. I absolutely *flew* by the line of cars crossing the Humber.
On the way back, I could definitely feel the burn riding up Bloor west of the Humber, but I was still moving at a decent pace.
Honestly, it was such a game changer for me. I look forward to being able to afford one to own - It made my commute so much more pleasant.
I regularly pick up 40 lbs of groceries on a bicycle that weighs more than 40 lbs alone. The weight is not a problem whatsoever.
Nor is rain. Truly heavy rain usually does not last more than 30 minutes, and light rain is a nothing-burger. And if you get wet, you're not made of sugar.
And heat? Wear a t-shirt, go slow. It's not a race.
No one expects anyone to regularly bike more than 5km one way. If it's a long distance, take public transit, or drive if the train/bus is inconvenient.
The bar owner had one good point just not the point he thought he was making. Just a handful of complaints can prevent something like his rooftop patio license. The city has long taught people that just a few local homeowners making a fuss overrule a city decision. Which is a terrible way to run a city. But now he's complaining about something and the city isn't bending over backwards to placate him.
I'm not gonna lie, I hate how bike lanes have turned into a culture war. It really doesn't have to be that way. I get it. People have concerns over traffic congestion but they act like bike lanes only benefit cyclists and do nothing else for a city.
I think of bike lanes as a step towards better [road design](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) and road diet, something that Toronto desperately lacks even by North American standards of a major city. This isn't just for cyclists. It's for drivers too. 2 lanes designs are far more dangerous than 1 lane given the number of conflict points. We as a society really underestimate the value of road design. Almost all the time countless hours are spent investigating a crash on [who is at fault](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z31YZj1kwiA) rather than finding ways to design this for prevention and mitigation.
Once again the owners who are against the bike lanes don't fully understand that revenue for their businesses would eventually expand after their completion. It also helps foster a local community that creates cohesion between residents, shop owners and suppliers.
Areas in the city that have safe bike lanes for people experiencing revenue stability because the cost of a bicycle is relatively cheap in comparison to a car especially when gas prices are going to be continued to be elevated unless gas prices go down over the next three decades. That's not going to happen by the way gas prices will continue to rise due to the catalyst material becoming more and more expensive.
But to explain that to people is difficult. A better way of doing this is just by example.
Roncesvalle (Roncy)- which has had bike lanes for nearly a decade is experiencing a stable local growth. A part of that is by fostering a community that allows for diverse transportation methods.
Bloor West Village - also now beginning to experience a boom in stable local growth after the installation of bike lanes.
Can someone please explain to me why people don’t want bike lanes? Like why is this a thing people oppose when it would arguably be a net positive for society
Ignoring all the carbrain comments, people have reasonable concerns against bike lanes:
1. Traffic congestion. Those people have no idea how traffic works. They think that adding a lane will improve traffic. BUT they also think that removing a lane will worsen traffic so everyone cannot move. This is the biggest reason. If they had space to drive around, it doesn't matter how many km of bike lanes exist. More of a personal commute reason.
2. Lack of knowledge about utility cycling. Many of the opposition are either non-cyclists or cyclists that only bike for fun/exercise/recreation. [Utility cycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling) is a completely foreign concept to many people in our North American society. Many people can't fathom biking to work, groceries, visit friends, short trips, errands, etc. As such, they do not see the potential for cycling.
3. TTC and public transit as a whole has severely lagged behind. They think that adding bike lanes is like an insult to a city building proper transportation. A lot of comments like "We should be improving TTC instead" show just how bad the TTC is. In reality however, bike lanes do not affect the development of new TTC projects. In fact, a lot of new lines opened are going to include complete streets (bike lanes) anyways.
4. Roads are almost never redesigned. Your average road on Toronto is 2-3 wide lanes each direction with absolutely no obstacles and intersection safety measures. See [stroads](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad). It's a very simple design that on paper looks very pretty to drive in. But causes a lot of hazards to all road users including drivers. If we had better advocacy for improved road design safety, we'd see way more support for bike lanes as many well designed roads across the world have cycling in mind.
5. Winters traditionally were fairly long. Back in what the 1970s, Toronto had really bad winters. It would snow into April (sometimes May). It's nothing like today's weather patterns where you're lucky to get more than 3 consecutive days of snow. It also doesn't help that Toronto is marketed as a cold city like other parts of Canada. Although to be fair, Ottawa/Montreal have bike lanes despite their colder weather patterns. It's just marketing is a huge one.
6. There's way too much car dependency relative to population density. Toronto might have a reliable TTC system. BUT if you were to scale it based on population density and compare similar densities in the world, Toronto has way too many cars for a city this large and dense. As such, it's very hard to convince people to *donate one lane* to cyclists. Not to mention how much on-street parking this city has. You don't see those people lobbying to remove on street parking to improve congestion.
Overall, it's tradition and lack of development. The society is a product of Toronto taking forever to commit to change out of its car dependency ways.
It's change. Pure and simple. Traffic continues to be bad. The city continues to grow. Bike lanes are an identifiable change, so therefore they blame it on that.
They're just railing against change, and the bike lanes are the easiest identifiable thing.
There is tons of parking around the Crooked Cue.
If he had any brains he’d be pushing the city to fix the bike lanes by widening the sidewalk so he can add street-level seating.
The “seniors need to cross safely” is bullshit. It’s actually safer to cross at corners now because of no right on red. And as if running across four lanes of traffic mid-block is safer than two.
Finally, what hospital are they rushing to? The nearest one is 5km away with multiple routes.
if car lovers had any sense they'd pimp the fuck out of transit and bike lanes so they could have the road all to themselves, but instead the argue for the very thing that will keep congestion high.
Your argument has been valid for the last 50-70+ years of Toronto's history. Seriously. If car lovers truly understood how to reduce congestion, we would've seen Eglinton Crosstown done 15 years ago. They love to use "transit is more important" excuse yet had multiple decades to vote for that but still chose cars lol? Really baffling.
In the Danforth Corridor, drivers are 8% of people travelling through.
EIGHT PERCENT.
And we let these donkeys steer the conversation.
92% of Torontonians want their public spaces back for their benefit. Certainly not the storage of empty sheet metal boxes.
Do we live in a democracy or an autocracy?
Toronto.ca/DanforthStudy
Example: https://imgur.com/gallery/0cG9Oky
> In the Danforth Corridor, drivers are 8% of people travelling through. EIGHT PERCENT.
[This is in the link that you shared](https://i.imgur.com/5OdY1ko.png)
There’s a lot there at the website but that table is a classic car red herring:
Here’s one of the display boards from the actual public consult:
https://imgur.com/gallery/0cG9Oky
Once seen, it cannot be unseen.
Yes, inhabited by alien life forms and different color skies and one business selling oobleck!!! - but many of the same damned drivers demanding a private expressway.
If drivers had to pay the true cost of driving they wouldn't be driving. We continue to subsidize a deeply harmful mode of transportation instead of investing in alternative modes of transportation.
As a driver this is engaging, i want more car lanes, and the right to drive my car on sidewalks if not through people and store fronts. The war on cars is a war on my freedumbs.
Having said that i am looking forward to the bike lane construction in my area to be done, it will make it much more walkable, let alone safer.
/r/Toronto and the Toronto Public Library encourage you to support local journalism if you are financially in a position to do so - otherwise, you can access many paywalled articles with a TPL card ([get a Digital Access card here](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/register/)) through the [TPL digital news resources](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/books-video-music/downloads-ebooks/digital-newspapers.jsp).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/toronto) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Pappas can’t understand how the city makes decisions — when 20 people complaining to the city were once able to prevent him from opening a rooftop patio but a petition with more than 13,000 names can’t persuade officials to rethink the bike lanes."
Its a logical point, but maybe the lesson here is we should stop listening to NIMBYs about more things.
Bike lanes in downtown toronto makes sense 6 months a yr. The lanes get use in toronto BUT they are super ugly with the posts and crap. The street patios need to go. Make them stop. There is no need to dine on the road. Bike lanes should not be implemented in other cities as they just do not get any use. I live in hamilton and we are ALL commuting out of town and clogged up with new bike lanes for 1 guy on a scooter to use on random Tuesdays and a pelaton of suburbanites in search of good coffee on sundays.
If we have to tolerate some of the councils more deranged decisions, then at least they're also being pigheaded about this.
We need more bikes and fewer cars and that's an end to it.
They did this in Brampton, all in the wrong spots. Some right turns are now single right turn instead of the dedicated right turn, causing congestion, disrupting flow. I haven't seen anyone use the bike lane. Brampton roads are not the safest for cycling to begin with.
Brampton is generally full of bad drivers so they wouldn't feel comfortable sharing the same road with drivers going 80 km/h on non-highways. Brampton would have to redesign roads completely so speeding this fast is difficult.
Cyclists in Toronto are a small and obnoxious minority. No one else wants our tax money going to fund bike lanes. The city is not designed for it, and has decent transit, which the cyclists also use, accompanied by their huge bikes. I would be happier if my taxes would eliminate all bike lanes.
Cyclists should also be required to carry insurance, display a license plate, and follow the law. For yelling at and harassing kids, people with strollers, elderly people for getting in their way on shared urban pathways, and for punching and kicking cars, they should be charged. There are good people who cycle as well, but the aggressive, obnoxious ones really stand out. Cycling in a city not designed for it attracts antagonistic people with Bigorexia.
> Cyclists in Toronto are a small and obnoxious minority.
And drivers aren't considered obnoxious?
> The city is not designed for it, and has decent transit, which the cyclists also use, accompanied by their huge bikes.
Amsterdam wasn't designed for cyclists back in 1970. In fact, it was designed very strongly for cars. Guess what? That all changed. Change doesn't happen overnight. You gotta start somewhere.
> No one else wants our tax money going to fund bike lanes
It only costs [$20M per year](https://dailyhive.com/toronto/toronto-add-100-km-new-bike-lanes) to fund bike lanes as of 2022. To put that into perspective, road repairs cost $500M total and that was using [2016](https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/05/03/are-drivers-paying-their-fair-share.html#:%7E:text=According%20to%20Steve%20Johnston%2C%20a,%24490%20million%20to%20%24510%20million.) numbers. The city would be saving a lot of money if more people biked.
> Cyclists should also be required to carry insurance, display a license plate, and follow the law.
If you want more cyclists to follow the laws, you should be wishing more bike lanes. Not less bike lanes. Lack of [safety](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBP2LTQxqZ8) is one of the biggest reasons cyclists violate laws.
> There are good people who cycle as well, but the aggressive, obnoxious ones really stand out.
You seem so concerned about obnoxious cyclists. Have you not considered how much worse drivers are in this city? My god you really are out of touch with what a good city looks like. Consider yourself lucky I even spent time responding to this comment. Most people wouldn't even read, let alone reply to such a comment to lecture you.
/r/Toronto and the Toronto Public Library encourage you to support local journalism if you are financially in a position to do so - otherwise, you can access many paywalled articles with a TPL card ([get a Digital Access card here](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/register/)) through the [TPL digital news resources](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/books-video-music/downloads-ebooks/digital-newspapers.jsp).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/toronto) if you have any questions or concerns.*
bro please no, traffic is already bad enough as it is. the Etobicoke part of bloor is backed up and that started as soon as they added the bike lanes out there
naw im good mate. id rather they have left it the same and just have people ride on the sidewalk. shit's fucked as it is.
sometimes you cant leave earlier dummy, if it was all so simple, everybody would be doing it
> id rather they have left it the same and just have people ride on the sidewalk.
Comments like this are exactly why our sidewalks are full of cyclists. Many people want fewer cyclists on the sidewalks but people like you are the reason why there are so many in sidewalks. The city should be doing its very best to reduce this, not ask cyclists to share with pedestrians.
Have no problem sharing the road with bike. However, bike people really need to follow the rules and held responsible. What is the point of having a designated bike lane if you don’t use it
> What is the point of having a designated bike lane if you don’t use it
Many people will use bike lanes if it's available. BUT it's also easy to notice cyclists that are outside of bike lanes. It could be a few reasons:
1. Too narrow and prefer to pass on the road (or worse sidewalk).
2. Most of the stretch is parked with cars.
3. Some bike lanes just start and end then restart for no reason. So some cyclists don't bother going in and out of bike lanes.
4. Uber Eats deliveries tend to promote sidewalk biking.
5. Some recreational cyclists tend to use roads because it's faster for speed. Though utility cyclists wouldn't.
You're just not noticing or remembering the people you see using the bike lane. By a wide margin most of the bikes on roads where there is a decent bike lane are using it, the odd one not in the lane has a good reason as stated above and one time some speed demon was out of the bike lane wondering why your car was going so slow. And if it was me and it was one of those terrible painted bike lanes next to parking, I was on the edge of the bike lane because the bike lane is a door zone and I like my bones just the way they are.
As a cyclist, I loathe the idea of bike lanes in main arterial roads. However, the western part of Bloor from Islington to Runnymede as mentioned in the article doesn't have a straightforward east-west alternative, unlike east-end Danforth where there's Strathmore Blvd. from Donlands to Woodbine. (I take this route frequently.)
I don't see an easy solution here that will make everyone happy. The current road design, where Bloor is the only practical road to cross the Humber River, means there is no other choice for the bike lanes.
Safety reasons. I do not feel safe on the arterial bike lanes in Scarborough because cars pass by at 70+ km/h.
On the other end of the extreme, putting in a bike lane to reduce a 2-lane arterial road to 1 is also terrible. Dundas East through Regent Park is now a gridlock nightmare because there's only 1 lane there, and it's also a streetcar route. The bike lane on Dundas East has made the situation much worse. I believe this is the situation with Bloor as well.
I use bike lanes all the time and think they're fantastic when implemented properly. But so many aren't. The Richmond bike lane is great. The Adelaide bike lane isn't because someone came up with the idiotic idea of moving it to the left side of the road, and drivers aren't used to that. I have seen a bike-car collision at Adelaide and Jarvis.
> Safety reasons. I do not feel safe on the arterial bike lanes in Scarborough because cars pass by at 70+ km/h.
Scarborough here. I totally agree. I can't be asked to bike on the road which is why IF and that's a big IF I were to bike, it would be on the sidewalk. Since it's illegal, I don't bike at all. I do wish there were bike lanes and complete [road designs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_diet) that cause people to drive slower.
> On the other end of the extreme, putting in a bike lane to reduce a 2-lane arterial road to 1 is also terrible.
[Studies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) have shown that 2 lane roads are worse road design than 1 lane roads.
> Dundas East through Regent Park is now a gridlock nightmare because there's only 1 lane there, and it's also a streetcar route. The bike lane on Dundas East has made the situation much worse
Congestion is not caused by the lack of lanes or cyclists. It's caused because there are too many drivers. The best way to relieve congestion is by reducing the number of total cars. And that can be done by providing people alternatives to driving. Even a 10% decrease in car traffic can go a long ways. Look at this [chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car-free_movement#/media/File:Passenger_Capacity_of_different_Transport_Modes.png) to give you an idea of how much space a single occupant car takes up per person. I strongly suggest you study the concept of [induced demand in inverse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#Reduced_demand_(the_inverse_effect)). This will explain a lot better than me.
> I believe this is the situation with Bloor as well.
Luckily for you, a group of volunteers did a [study](https://old.reddit.com/r/torontobiking/comments/1d2yybl/new_bloor_bike_counts_from_tcbc/) showing the cycling growth after less than a year since Bloor Bike lanes were installed. That's remarkable despite most not having North-South connections and only being a few km long.
> I use bike lanes all the time and think they're fantastic when implemented properly. But so many aren't. The Richmond bike lane is great.
Bike lanes can always be improved. You're correct that many bike lanes aren't great but that's largely because we give so much road space to drivers and our designs are focused on inconveniencing them the least amount possible as opposed to safety.
>[Studies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) have shown that 2 lane roads are worse road design than 1 lane roads.
>
Thats only because the one lane road design has a center lane and is largely stroads with minimal turns. Entirely different than dundas which is a major street with many intersections and turns and no center lane.
They literally had to remove the brimley bike lane because it caused so much traffic being a 2 lane road. Its 4 lanes and is back to normal.
Are you seriously trying to lecture a cyclist on traffic patterns using videos which could be easily disproven with real camera footage from the problem locations? I could put up a tripod at Sumach and Dundas East, where it is 1 lane, and show how silly this "too many drivers" hypothesis is. But all you need to see is how sections of the Gardiner Expressway have recently been reduced to 1 lane to know how crippling it is. A 3-lane Gardiner wouldn't magically solve everything, but it'd certainly be better than the 1-lane Gardiner we have right now.
As someone who used to cycle in regent park, every time they tried to “improve” the cycling network they made it shittier to live there.
Things like closing Bayview for activeTO when there’s literally a nicer bike lane that follows the don valley is a great example.
The point of bike infrastructure is so that people have an alternative to driving. The way it is being used is to enforce an ideological outcome, and big surprise, people don’t like that.
Your argument for reducing a street to one lane because of bike lanes is nonsensical
When there would just be parked cars and effectively making it a one lane street anyways without bike lanes.
Those are huge detours, and it's like asking someone to go from Bloor to Queens Quay because the Martin Goodman bike lane is fast and clear. I remember when people protested the removal of the Jarvis bike lane, saying that a _one-road detour_ to Sherbourne was too much of a hassle. Those people would never detour to St. Clair or Queensway.
The only alternative to cross Humber River is Old Mill Road, but the uphill climb there is too much of a struggle for those without e-bikes. And conversely, the downhill slope is daunting and dangerous.
> As a cyclist, I loathe the idea of bike lanes in main arterial roads.
Out in Etobicoke, one of the main challenges is that natural or manmade features mean that not just the most direct way, but often the *only* way between two points is through an arterial - the Humber, the hydro field, the hydro station, the creeks, meandering streets, etc. We're in desperate need of a connected cycling network, and we have lots of space to implement separated lanes safely, but many of the direct routes are arterials. Islington and Kipling are solid N-S choices, and there isn't much else that isn't a meandering route on side streets where the city will only give sharrows at best.
Rathburn Road is a weird one. East of Martin Grove, it's a strip of paint. Traffic doesn't move THAT quickly, but you're still close to it. West of Martin Grove, there's a large painted buffer between the lane and the vehicle lane, and it's NIGHT AND DAY. It's so much nicer cycling west of Martin Grove than east.
you obviously havent even gone to look at this implementation have you? you obviously dont undertand what happens when you reduce a major artery from 2 lanes to 1 lane. sigh. this is what sensible people are up against. a cyclist mafia that thrives on its own ignorant self-righteousness.
Actually, I have. I have seen this myself when I visit those areas. In fact, I also watch videos like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) that have shown that on average, 1 lane is way better than 2 lanes.
I personally have. Realistically, you'd be naive to think the average person would opt to bike over driving/subway/bus/uber even if the roads were made safer for bikers -- especially in temperate climates like Canada where the weather is highly variable. Also, don't forget about the bike theft orgs.
Many Asian mega cities have always relied mainly on cycling to the point where cyclists and e-cyclists completely flooded the streets for both cars and pedestrians alike. Modern day advancements in their subway systems greatly alleviated this problem. So, 0/2.
> Realistically, you'd be naive to think the average person would opt to bike over driving/subway/bus/uber even if the roads were made safer for bikers
How do we know that? I mean Toronto hasn't built bike infrastructure in a grand scale until lately. And despite all its bike infrastructure shortcomings, BikeShare has recently broke a [record](https://www.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/1di83xn/bike_share_toronto_bikeshareto_on_x_were_breaking/?rdt=41390). And it's already started growing since [2019](https://old.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/18ar8xa/some_graphs_i_made_showing_the_growth_of_bike/). Obviously at the end of the day we shouldn't expect bikes to completely replace cars but at least having this option available to us is important.
> especially in temperate climates like Canada where the weather is highly variable.
Ottawa/Montreal have even more extreme climates. Yet that didn't stop them from consistently building bike lanes.
> Also, don't forget about the bike theft orgs.
Sure I'll give you that but we have an expanding BikeShare program.
> Many Asian mega cities have always relied mainly on cycling to the point where cyclists and e-cyclists completely flooded the streets for both cars and pedestrians alike
Do you even know how little space bikes take up? Perhaps you should look a this [chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car-free_movement#/media/File:Passenger_Capacity_of_different_Transport_Modes.png) should give you an idea. You should be thankful that for every bike, there's 1 less car on the road.
> Modern day advancements in their subway systems greatly alleviated this problem.
Building bike lanes do not impede the progress of subways being built. In fact, a lot of the new subway lines include bike lanes on their street.
apparently the guy on the left started the petition and organized the open house where people called for cyclists on bloor to be run over for using the bike lanes. and go figure, the email address he is using as a public figure and motorist advocate belongs to a real estate holding company: http://www.twowheeledpolitics.ca/2024/03/calling-out-etobicoke-opponents-on-bloor.html
What's really frustrating is that many opponents of bike lanes I've encountered are actually cyclists (including Cody!), but they're recreational cyclists. These are the sorts of people who will load their bike on a rack and drive an hour out of the city to a trailhead for a ride through a forest before they'll ever consider starting and ending a trip at their front door yet they feel their voice is more important than the people who actually ride in the city to go places and do things.
Recreational cyclists tend to believe that [utility cyclists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling) don't exist. Not all but quite a lot of them. It's such a common phenomenon to see comments like "I'm a cyclist but I don't support bike lanes". At first I thought they were lying until I realized that not every cyclist does utility. Then you also got the [vehicular cyclists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling) who think that safety of cyclists is bound to personal responsibility as opposed to infrastructure (see #Criticism section for that page).
I think that's a big part of why they don't think that bike lanes can reduce traffic. They simply cannot fathom that people use bicycles to travel from point A to point B; they see it as an intrusion of hobbyists into a space that should be reserved for necessary transportation.
> they see it as an intrusion of hobbyists into a space that should be reserved for necessary transportation. They are completely wrong and I don't blame them. It's largely a problem with our culture and tradition. Biking was never really marketed towards anything but exercise. By marketed I mean the stereotype of your average cyclist. However, the mindset is changing, albeit slowly. We're seeing more people make utility cycling trips thanks to better bike lanes.
Biking as a means of transportation saw a huge upswing in the '70s because of the oil crisis. It was during this era that Toronto staff first proposed a Bloor-Danforth cycle track, but it was also during this era that John Forester was peddling (heh) vehicular cycling and most governments were drawn by the allure of simply pretending bicycles were small cars instead of spending money building cycling infrastructure.
I used to see things from the 'vehicular cyclist' point of view when I was younger, partially because I'd been riding for utility since I was a teenager and all the way through adulthood. It was only after I thought about things for a while that I realised that not many people had the kinds of experience that I did as a cyclist and if we want to encourage more people to ride more often, it had to be with infrastructure that was safer than riding unprotected in traffic lanes.
I am a vehicular cyclist, but as you noted, I recognize that my comfort and confidence on a bike is unique to myself and if we expect more people to pick up bikes and see cycling as a viable alternative to transportation, they need safer infrastructure. Basically the safer the infrastructure, the lower the floor of person who will be willing to bike. I might be comfortable biking in mixed traffic but I know that my experience is not universal.
As a utility cyclist, I have a lot of respect for vehicle riders, but I’ll stick to a bike lane if I have one. On side streets sure, and there are bike lanes that are so messed up I’ll take my chances with the cars, but I don’t like it. If cars want bikes like me out of their way, repair the bike lanes, make more, and make it easier for me to stay on side streets instead of redirecting all traffic to the main arteries.
Exactly. Safety is one of the biggest barriers of entry for cycling. And by providing bike infrastructure, we help bridge the gap.
I think you really need to define “safety”. The provision of bike lanes thus far, has led to complacency for cyclists, advocates, and enforcement. There doesn’t seem to be any training, PSAs, or enforcement of the rules of the road. There’s no mandatory training even though they are considered a vehicle, and now they feel “safe” but with no knowledge (or respect) for the rules, they are a danger to themselves and others. They’re not “safe”, they’re protected. Even then, the cyclists in the bike lane are not protected from motorized bikes and scooters which are also a hazard to pedestrians and motorists. To actually make them safe, they need to be educated. Put the baby gate up but also teach the child to use stairs. Otherwise, they’re a danger to themselves and others.
They downvoted me for suggesting that the idaho stop will just lead to more collisions if cyclists arent educated on when and where its appropriate. Dont need 13 year old Johnny running a blind intersection and getting hit. Cant give this sort of legal power to everyone even if you personally are okay with it.
It’s things like riding the wrong way down a one way street where there’s no stop sign at the end so they just ride straight into traffic without thinking. Whose fault is that? The cyclist who’s been made to feel “safe”, or the motorist who was following the HTA. My point is, the advocates have installed bike lanes to “protect” cyclists but without anyone following rules no one is “safe”.
Would love to see your stats that show that injuries of cyclists have been caused by them breaking laws and riding unsafely.
https://www.tcat.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Mapping-Cycling-Behaviour-in-Toronto.pdf Look at (2.1.4) 74% of cyclists in Toronto have a drivers license
You're not doing them any favours if they think they are safe but they aren't... They probably won't get hurt - but all it takes is one good scare to a cyclist who is in over their head, and they likely quit for good .You need basic skills to swim in the deep end, and bike lanes don't cut it
This fits with the stereotype of people online stating "I'm an avid cyclist but..." followed by something bananas like "nobody uses a bike to get groceries" or "if you can't protect yourself you shouldn't be on the road" or "I don't understand why bikes need road space when they can just cycle around a track."
I was a vehicular cyclists for a long time. I felt like bike lanes were for the weak and made you soft. I was also really indifferent to my own well-being
It's quite possible to be both - I am.
Based on the way you write your comments, especially in this thread, you seem more leaned towards vehicular cycling than utility cycling.
Huh? I am a vehicular cyclist who commutes to work and rides for recreation on the weekend . Vehicular cycling IS utilitarian cycling . You need skills to do both, Unfortunately in this city few cyclists can be bothered - they let the bike lane do the thinking for them - and often the results are not pleasant.
I'm not judging you for being a vehicular cyclist that bikes for recreation or bikes on a dangerous road. I just don't like how your comments generally tend to advocate for people to do the same. While you're correct that knowing how to navigate a road is important, infrastructure is significantly more important when it comes to the safety of individuals. I suggest you watch this [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z31YZj1kwiA).
Also road cyclists, especially those who live in the suburbs and still drive everywhere for everything. I know people like this, and they generally think that people don't want to use a bike for any practical purpose, partly because all of their neighbours are likely also drivers. They only want the odd painted bike lane for their own rides, and this is frustrating.
It really is amazing how butthurt they get over bike lanes just because they sit and stew in traffic while they watch cyclists zip on by.
They should just picture the bike lanes as parked cars and feel the wave of calm wash over them.
You mean ebikes zip by.
Sure, at like a 50 to 1 ratio to regular and pedal assist bikes MAYBE.
not everyone is riding an ebike
No we mean cyclists I think you might want to open a dictionary and look at what cyclist means And also maybe actually go outside instead of your dungeon so you can see there are so many more regular bikes than e-bikes.
Exactly. He should be ignored and not given a platform to share ideas that are genuinely harmful
Imagine thinking a bike lane is ugly and a row of parked cars is not lmao
And you NEVER hear them complain about one less lane on main artery streets due to parking on the right lane. But the minute a bike lane taking less width (typically, unless there’s buffer room which I do prefer) then suddenly OMG I CAN’T DRIVE ANYWHERE ANYMORE WITH THE CONGESTION (god forbid I plan ahead for the extra 5-15 extra mins). Parked cars are never an issue for congestion apparently.
Because Toronto is so obsessed with cars. They think anything that benefits cars = necessary even if it impedes more traffic.
Thank Rob "Crack Angel" Ford for that one.
i don't buy any of it tbh. i think bike lanes and cyclists are this weird proximate for what they think are lefty/pinko lifestyles and there's this kneejerk and inextricable hatred they have as a result. every argument they throw at this is a boogeyman, total bullshit or easily upended by data.
I’m what you’d consider conservative, I love cycling of all types, and I think we need more bike lanes. I hate this left-right view of cycling.
where do you think the hatred for bikes comes from? it definitely seems aligned with populist/right wing politics in general in Canada, but i don't really get why
Auto lobbying? IDK. it does general fit with the vibe of clueless suburbanite in a mega-cab pickup frustrated by everyone else doing exactly what they're doing.
Because a long time ago the Car lobby of north america correlated ones right to freedom of movement is tied to car ownership, when advocating for more highways and car infrastructure to be built at the expense of public transport. The narrative sold was a government that wants to invest in public transport is a government that wants infringe on its citizens freedom of movement by disincentivising private vehicle ownership. As if a couple trains and pedestrian only traffic districts is some how preventing people from owning cars. This narrative still holds strong today when you hear pundits yell conspiracy theories about 15 minute cities when discussions surrounding zoning laws is brought up.
Cycling advocates link cycling and bike lanes to addressing climate change, and populist right wing politics is anti anything that's climate change related.
Honestly, if they complain so much about traffic, they need to look at on-street parking instead. It serves way fewer people that even a live traffic lane. What is it? 20 cars per block as a sitting duck?
Cheap on street parking needs to go die a fiery death. Major intersections are reduced to one lane each way, and for what? How much does a single parked car really move the needle for businesses on that block?
Whitby types don't know what to do with their lives if there isn't a steering wheel directly in front of them.
None of these mfers have ever been to Amsterdam. The order that’s there for biking was glorious to watch.
Amsterdam comparison is getting tiresome: https://acme.com/same_scale/#43.69363,-79.41510,52.37041,4.89707,13,M,M I can guarantee you no tourist has been outside of the ring road, which is similar in size to the core of Toronto. In the map above, the Bloor St bike lanes are not even shown because they are so far out from the core.
A better comparison is Munich (where I lived for 2 years). 1.5M people, gets snow every winter (-20 in winter, +30 in summer), industrial areas on the outskirts of the city....and yet amazeballs public transit (trams, subways, surface rail, long distance rail), separated bike lanes everywhere, and a pedestrianized core. Not as good for bikes as the Netherlands, but I still didn't need a car while living there (in the suburbs). It's also the headquarters of BMW and it's just down the road from the Audi headquarters in case anyone thinks it's not a car town. Lots of people drive. And yet they still build bike infrastructure and public transit.
When I visited Amsterdam I stayed in a suburb well outside of the central touristy ring area and easily biked back and forth to the city centre through parks and on bike lanes, probably at least 7 or 8km, maybe a 20ish minute bike ride. Not sure what you're on about.
Was it 3 degrees with snow there?
what snow are you talking about? the 1-2 cm that fall every other months and are gone a day or two later here in Toronto? I've seen about the same in the Netherlands.
Unless you happen to want to walk safely ...
To be honest, I think these iterations of bikes are pretty ugly, especially with the big flexi posts and (on lanes like these) all the chicanes to get around the parking spots. It's such an afterthought and looks like crap. But yeah, no worse than a line of parked cars. If we are serious about building infrastructure then build them properly, fully segregated and off the road. Build out the sidewalks, add a bike lane, then put the curb and road. Hopefully one day...
Anytime you add a cement barrier or flexpost- you're actually adding an item of possible obstruction and danger tot he bike lane
I love love love that a bar owner is complaining that not enough people can drive to (and presumable drive away from) his drinking establishment.
i hope someone call them out on this
It's a running theme: One of the bigger opponents of the Danforth bike lanes is also a bar owner. He's argued that it's too dangerous for his patrons to walk the ~200m to a nearby Green P lot or ~100m to the subway.
This is bad faith engagement at worst and entitlement at best, casting doubt on the data collected by the city, and insisting automobile drivers be of the utmost priority. There is ample research demonstrating that drivers cause congestion - period. To insist we prioritize driving is to insist on a low-efficiency subsidy for those who drive. *It is automobile socialism*. These very same people would strongly object to free TTC use, calling it a handout, whereas automobile infrastructure costs this city immensely. Again, young people and progressives: VOTE. Turnout. Sign petitions. Don't allow those engaging in bad faith and misguided entitlement to *make decisions for you*. We'd be a force if we turned out like these people do.
This. Cars cause traffic. There’s only so much road and we can’t make it bigger. Every time someone goes off about bike lanes i wonder, what are they blaming the bumper to bumper on the 401 or DVP on? The Gardiner is at a standstill because of essential maintenance, we can’t have miles of road infrastructure that will never need work. There’s too many cars trying to fit into too small a space and new roads are not magically going to appear.
Im in midtown. The fact that I can bike all the way to king west faster than transit and driving while encountering traffic says enough. People don’t understand induced demand and how counter intuitive it is that building wider roads doesn’t actually fix traffic
It's just a cost issue. Nobody should be surprised that the city is suddenly building a lot of bike infrastructure, because city council _loves_ solving problems with the most cost-effective solution. Building more roads requires a lot of space. Building more subway and streetcar routes requires a lot of time and money. Adding more buses requires a lot of labour (which is expensive in Toronto). Bike infrastructure is extremely easy and cheap by comparison.
> Again, young people and progressives: VOTE. Who should I vote for when every party (that are actually contenders) in my riding are against bike lanes?
That depends on which riding you're in. What's up? Where you at? Also, bike lanes largely come down to city council, so you can look for your bike lane lovin' city council candidate to support.
Etobicoke center :'( I keep throwing my vote away every year on the NDP. But that strategy hasn't been very successful for me.
You and me both. But if we keep on sending that support, the party knows that there IS support and that we DO care and that we want and need the change they are trying to make happen (from your probably much older neighbour who still cares).
[удалено]
I wish that was the answer, but speaking as a Gen-Xer, there's more than enough of us with stupid ideas in our stupid heads to replace the dying Boomers.
Less and less every generation and fewer and fewer people who are stuck on this deranged idea of ripping down the open highway in your drop top mustang on the way to see your best gal and drive to your grandparents fancy $20,000 house for a barbecue in the giant backyard. I'm not convinced it wont get better. Not yet.
But then youll be a boomer and voting conservative…so theres that
It is so embarrassing being represented by Holyday
Every single one of our representatives at each level is an absolute embarrassment. Not a single one of them have any redeeming qualities.
I've met Baker several times and he seems like a pleasant person. He's really active in the community and is very responsive. But goddamn, what the hell is up with his politics? Between the zombie-walking law, going after Chow, and this wild obsession with a municipal infrastructure issue that's not even in his goddamn riding, I genuinely do not believe that he is even close to representing my interests. Don't get me started on Surma. What a disaster she is. I'll say positive things about Dan McLean, our TDSB trustee. He actually gives a shit about public education.
You know I didn't even think about our school board trustee, but it's good to know we have at least one rep that is good.
The NDP support bike lanes, even in that riding, no??
They do, but they have as much of a chance of winning here as me.
I'd just keep voting NDP, then. Even if to push certain policies, have the Liberals adopt them, and continually elect a nobody like Yvan Baker. Ridings are subject to boundary changes, and policies and candidates are subject to change as well. You're vote is not wasted. You're contributing to what *could* be an incremental change toward progressive policy.
There's nothing we can do in our current electoral system about that. :(
Overall I agree with your message but feel the need to correct the sentiment that “socialism is when the government does stuff”. Socialism is an entire economic and political system in which the working class owns and exerts control over the means of production.
Thank you for the correction! Indeed, I was being rather facetious. I do appreciate, though, that you want to ensure we not muddle the discourse with misinformation. In the future I'll perhaps not be so fast and loose with my rhetoric. ;)
+1. "The government is governing" is what happens in countries that function. They're welcome to head over to the libertarian paradises of Sudan and Haiti if they'd like less of that.
I am thankful that it sounds like the city is going to jam this through. If the deal is that we don't get a car brained doink, and instead we have to deal with someone who is going to waste our money on Sankofa square but give us bike lanes in exchange, I don't hate it tbh.
>“Never in my life have I seen something create such a backlash and an uproar,” said owner Sam Pappas, who, like many other local business owners, thinks the lanes are ugly, and make it difficult for local customers and those outside the neighbourhood to visit. There is ample parking west of Montgomery at the Green P lot, and a short walk to his establishment, same to the east at Willington Road if no street parking is available. There is still parking along Birchview which is just north of Bloor too, and that street runs behind his establishment. To say it is difficult for anyone to visit is quite a stretch because all of that parking was available before the bike lane went in.
From the King St transit priority lanes to the Bloor St bike lane, again and again we would discover than the business owners complaining about bikes lanes were really concerned about losing their own ability to park directly in front of their business every morning.
Who drives to king street to sit in a restaurant lmao Most of their patrons walk there anyways or Uber
From Tom Riley Park to Prince Edward, there are literally HUNDREDS of Green P parking spots within a one-block walk of Bloor Street. It's incredibly easy to park on that part of Bloor. This is all available on the Green P website. They didn't remove much in the way of on-street parking at all. As someone who drives through the neighbourhood periodically, it's only *really* busy at rush hour, and even then, it adds maybe two minutes to my journey. Not unnoticeable, but not a dealbreaker. It's much easier to visit the neighbourhood on a bike anyway. My biggest issue is that the bike lane network doesn't go far enough. It needs to extend N-S, where a ton of people live. I know that's on the plan, but it would be *sooooooooooo simple* to put separated lanes on Kipling between Lakeshore and Eglinton.
I’m a driver who frequently parks where there are separated bikes lanes. On average it’s not any more difficult or easier than parking on any other street parking. I prefer cyclists have a lane. And some of these times it’s like 5:30 or 6 pm on a main road. Also ducking down onto a side street is often an easy alternative I think some drivers insist on always being able to park right outside a shop. Oh no, walk for 2-5 minutes? The horror.
Also a driver. I've had this thought! Why is walking to the car such a great hardship?
This also completely ignores the fact that every study has shown that by adding bike lanes and reducing on street parking has actually been a huge positive for local businesses both in terms of number of patrons and money spent. This guy is complaining on his feelings when the facts show it will benefit him.
Interested to read those studies. Links?
I wouldn’t say it’s difficult, it’s just annoying. I avoid driving through the Kingsway area now.
Cody Macrae, he of the anti-bike lane petition can be seen regularly using the bike lanes on Lakeshore lol. If you follow his herd, you are an idiot.
Huh, is he biking on the bike lanes?
Correct. Sometimes him and his posse take the side streets and go right through the middle. The very definition of obnoxious cyclists who give the rest of us a bad name.
This type of person is a stereotypical [vehicular cyclist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling). He likely only bikes for recreation and never for [utility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling). It's a very common phenomenon that people like him will vote against bike lanes. A quote taken from the Wikipedia page to prove this theory: > The movement surrounding vehicular cycling has also been criticized for its effect on bicycle advocacy in general. In Pedaling Revolution, Jeff Mapes states that Forester **"fought bike lanes, European-style cycletracks, and just about any form of traffic calming", and "saw nothing wrong with sprawl and an auto-dependent lifestyle."[17]** Zack Furness is highly critical of vehicular cyclists in One Less Car: Bicycling and the Politics of Automobility, arguing that their criticism of 'political' cyclists "totally ignores all the relevant socioeconomic, physical, material, and cultural factors that influence—and in most cases dictate—everyday transportation choices."[18] Critical Mass co-founder Chris Carlsson describes vehicular cycling as a naïve, polarizing "ideology" that "essentially advocates bicyclists should strive to behave like cars on the streets of America."[19] **The makeup of vehicular cycling advocates as a group in the United States was criticized in the 1990s for being typically club cyclists that are well educated, upper-middle income or wealthy, suburban, and white, representing a social and economic elite that are able to dominate public discussions of cycle planning issues.[20]** Vehicular cyclists have also been disproportionately male. In the US, males make up 88% of total cyclist fatalities.[21]
[удалено]
People don’t bike because they’re afraid of drivers in cars and don’t realize how awesome it is to get around by bike. I cycle all year round for work, play, criminal misdeeds. It’s great and I try to get people to join in. But a constant refrain I hear is “but the drivers are crazy and there’s no bike infrastructure!” Which saddens me. Because while yes there remain many shitty drivers, the bike infrastructure has GREATLY improved since I moved here in 2016. Admittedly I’m downtown/Leslieville but I can plan most of my trips with like 80% bike lane coverage these days.
Until they start building biking infrastructure where cyclists don't share the road with cars/trucks (ala Copenhagen) and Canada actually raises the bar considerably when it comes to handing out driver's licences, I'll stick with public transportation when travelling in the heart of the city.
It’s gotten so much better though! I think you’d be surprised. Adelaide/Richmond/University/Bloor/College all have physically separated lanes which are being improved over time. Shuter is an excellent route east of Yonge and connects to Dundas via River which has lanes East of Parliament.
Totally agree. I think a lot of peoples views on cycling in Toronto are outdated. If you haven't biked downtown within the last year or so, it's time to try it again. It's improving a lot, and very quickly. It's absolutely night and day to how it was pre-COVID. It's like a totally different city as a cyclist.
Bike share bikes are probably the best way to get around downtown anyways (if you’re not wearing a dress or formal clothes)
Even if you are! I’ve biked to many work events/conferences downtown using them. I tend to get less messy with them because they have chain guards and solid fenders that protect from any grime. Maybe not idea for lunch at the height of summer but otherwise, great! The e-bikes are especially great if you’re worried about being sweaty.
Shuter's a *dream*. If every road was like Shuter I'd never get off my bike.
It's been improving in places, but the problem I've found is that there's just no infrastructure connecting the places I need to go. If I were to ride to work from my place in Midtown, I would have to weave and wind around the city to stay on bike lanes. And the quality of the lanes can vary greatly, and sometimes just don't exist if there's construction happening.
The heart of the city is the safest area to cycle in, its the suburbs where you really face danger. But I don't blame anyone for not feeling safe enough on the roads. The fact we have a bike share program that is so popular that it expands every year, but don't provide safe facilities for the users is shocking. The demand is there, time to build it out.
The refrain I hear from other cyclists I know is "I don't want my bike to be stolen or vandalized." I have no hesitation riding from North-east East York to the core and west, but I wouldn't leave my bike locked outside downtown for hours while I was at work. Already had a bike stolen from the racks outside Woodbine Station, so I can't recommend using a bike for last mile from the subway either. Infrastructure has improved, and I hope that will continue - especially outside the core. But legitimate fear of bike theft or vandalism is going to remain an obstacle for a lot of cyclists who might otherwise be interested.
Bikeshare is great for this, for anyone who mostly travels where stations exist
My own bike is an upright 3i, so I thought Bikeshare would work for me, but it didn't. Nearest station is 700m in the wrong direction - and I'm closer to it than most people in my neighbourhood. I need to carry more than that silly little bracket on the front will hold and the front end of those is already dead heavy. (Why don't Bikeshare bikes have rear racks?) Just not a backpack person. Also I don't ride without a helmet, and I don't want to tote a helmet just in case Bikeshare works out one way. My own bike I know is in good repair and the gearing is normal and correct. I'm riding on an arterial road in the dark (part of the year) with heavy trucks hurtling past at best available speed. My own bike is just safer to use in these conditions.
Yeah I fully understand that. When I first moved to TO my bike was stolen within 3 weeks because I left it locked up to a shitty fence. I don’t want to say it’s a “overblown” concern, because it’s totally valid. But honestly, I think a solid lock and a high traffic lock up location is a solid deterrent I find. It’s mostly a crime of opportunity. (Maybe lock it up to a nicer looking bike with a worse lock….) But like someone else mentioned, BikeShare is amazing for that concern (for people who live within the ever expanding radius).
Lock it up next to a nicer looking bike??? So throw another cyclist under the bus is your best suggestion? Please. A lot of bike thieves will take anything they can get - and with an angle grinder that's pretty much everything. They flip them for a few dollars they use to appease whatever demons they struggle with. I hope your luck holds. I rely on my bike for everything, so I can't afford to be so trusting. My first bike got stolen because the rack got cut. My current bike has two locks: An Abus U-lock and a Kryptonite heavy chain. Yes I carry almost 4kg of locks. They haven't got it yet, but they get frustrated and pull hard or kick the bike, slashed the saddle and the tires. This is on the Danforth, so yes, a high traffic location. I don't expect passersby to intervene. Their own safety comes first and I respect that. My suggestion would be to do more to incentivize employers to provide secure indoor parking for cyclist employees. Businesses are always hungry for positive recognition. Something as simple as the city giving them recognition for doing that could bring results. Also give people living in apartments the right to bring their bikes into their units if they choose. Theft from underground parking and apartment storage is also a known issue.
I was mostly being facetious. I agree with all those options. I’m lucky that I have access to secure parking at work
> In the grid of basically Islington/Kipling to the west, call it Woodbine to the east, the water to the south and maybe Lawrence or York Mills to the north, it's quicker to bike pretty much any time of the year, pretty much anywhere you want to go. During rush hour, Royal York between Bloor and Queensway is a TOTAL NIGHTMARE because of all the drivers taking their kids to school. The buses are stuck in traffic and can't move around, but the cyclists in the bike lanes? FLYING BY. Once you get off the arterials, riding a bike is totally speedy out in Etobicoke. The problem is that the arterials connect a LOT of places, and many of them are demonstrably faster than cycling because they're basically highways. If you live in Central Etobicoke, like Kipling/Eglinton, you'll never get to Sherway even remotely faster on a bike than in a car. If Etobicoke had more amenities scattered throughout communities, rather than massive hubs in a select few locations, it would be much easier to live with just bikes.
Honestly the main reason I don't cycle as a means of transportation is because I'm too chicken shit to leave my bike locked up outside unattended for more than 2 minutes. Lack of contiguous infrastructure also doesn't help but tbf there is a lot of stuff I can reach reasonably safely from my home by bicycle. It's mainly fear of theft that limits me to recreational riding, where the bike never leaves my side.
[удалено]
> You'll never theft-proof your bike. Yea, that along with it being rampant is the problem. Cops are literally telling us to just let thieves just have our cars, what chance does my bike stand against one of the pettiest forms of petty crime? I'd have to get a beater, a lock that costs as much or more than the beater, and then scuff the shit out of it, and even then it could still get stolen at which point I'm out several hundred bucks for nothing, worse if they cut the lock. I'd rather walk, drive to Walmart, or order online to get stuff. I wish I could cycle as I could go further and get more stuff than I could walking without having to deal with the cost/time/annoyance of finding parking, but this is the city we live in.
It clearly depends on the neighborhood, but this idea that people are walking around with battery powered angle grinders is a little more prevalent than reality. Bike theft is a crime of opportunity. If you leave a nice looking bike out in the open for hours, it's going to be at some risk. Contrary to what most people seem to think, it doesn't look like your bike is going to vanish during the 30 minutes you're in a Walmart unless you've left it unlocked in a high traffic area. Sure, someone can slice through a D lock with said angle grinder in about 15 minutes. But that's 15 minutes with a tool shrieking away and sparks flying everywhere. It's going to get some attention. Also bikeshare exists. Sure, they're far from amazing, but it exists.
This is strange to me. I live downtown and I've never had a problem, as long as I have a good lock and I lock my front tire with a cable. My wife has had someone take her seat a few times. Like maybe 3 times over the past 20 years. I used to have to leave my bike locked outside all the time, before I moved somewhere with a bike storage room. Actually, my wife's bike was once stolen out of the storage room, but neither of our bikes were taken when they had to be locked outside. Yea, there's a chance that someone will try to steal your bike or something off of your bike, but based on a few decades of experience, I would never use that as a reason not to bike.
Indeed. I wouldn't leave my bike unattended at a ring lock overnight but have no problem during the day. Been cycling in Toronto since 2007 pretty much year-round and the only time it was stolen was from my backyard in Parkdale when I got lazy and didn't lock it back there. Been leaving it outside the office for years without issue. My current bike isn't top of the line but a decent single speed (Fuji Feather) and I have a good quality lock plus no quick release components. Probably an unpopular opinion but when I chatted with the owner of a bike store he opined that a decent percentage of bikes stolen simply aren't locked up properly. Thieves will always go for the easy target and I've seen bikes accidentally locked to nothing on numerous occasions - done it myself in the past but luckily nobody noticed.
> we now have bikes where you push a button, and you go Came for this comment. We are literally witnessing the birth of the micro-digitization of transportation solutions via eBikes and eScooters. The paradigm has shifted more than people realize. Bike lanes, in the last 5 years, have become ultra-valuable. Sure some of these arguments may have had some merit years ago, but anyone spouting them off now is a complete dinosaur. Someone should buy this guy an eBike and an eScooter.
Mostly I really don’t like the traffic and get quite nervous. Never drove either, I’m not cut out for it I think. I’m a lifelong subway/pedestrian type.
>In the grid of basically Islington/Kipling to the west, call it Woodbine to the east, the water to the south and maybe Lawrence or York Mills to the north, it's quicker to bike pretty much any time of the year, pretty much anywhere you want to go. I love this take. Hillarious.
For me: Kingston road and then danforth is a death trap for cycling Especially at night when motorist ignore things like red lights and checking blind spots and speed limits and the road becomes the Authobahn It gets dark by 5 in fall. I just can’t be biking home in the dark on that street
It’s way faster cycling into downtown than the alternatives from the east end as well. For some reason theres a gap in the bike lanes though, there’s no link from Dundas lanes to Gerrard lanes, which I have no doubt discourages potential riders. Very frustrating, those little connectivity gaps are everywhere.
Honestly, because cycling is inconvenient if you need to bring anything with you and limits the distance you can travel. I can't bring my work kit, my hobby items, prepared food for an event or anything bigger than 10-15lbs on a bicycle and I certainly can't use a bike to visit friends and family outside of the city. I also don't want to get soaked in the rain or sweaty and tired in the heat. Cars are more comfortable, practical and convenient. People aren't going to just magically decide to start riding bicycles more because there's more infrastructure. Everyone who wants to ride a bike is already riding one. I like riding a bicycle as a fun activity, but using one as your main mode of transportation sucks hard unless your entire life is contained in a small area and you never carry anything bigger than a backpack.
>Cars are more ... practical Except they manifestly aren't in a big city. There aren't enough roads for everyone to have a car and drive everywhere (and park). Driving becomes impractical when you pass a certain level of density.
Cycling as a form of commute is not meant to ENTIRELY replace cars. Your examples make sense that cycling would not be viable. However, we often underestimate how many cycle-able trips we can actually make. For example, a North American [study](https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1230-march-21-2022-more-half-all-daily-trips-were-less-three-miles-2021) has shown that 50% of the trips by a car are less than 5 km long. I'm sure you can convert a good portion of those into cycling trips provided we have infrastructure. Also, regarding your concern about heat/sweat, luckily for you, this isn't 1984. This is 2024 where we have electric bikes that give us the pedal assist for when we're tired. Keep that in mind next time you choose a new commuter bike. You're right that cars are comfortable and have way more potential tasks. But a lot of people do not like driving because it's not good for your [personal health](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEEWqddlYQw). But we choose to drive because our transit and biking infrastructure are below average for a large city. You shouldn't expect people to magically start riding a bike the moment new bike lanes open. That's like saying that if you open a new coffee shop, it'll be packed with customers right away. Actually, scratch that. A [Bloor West study](https://old.reddit.com/r/torontobiking/comments/1d2yybl/new_bloor_bike_counts_from_tcbc/) (done by volunteers albeit so take for grain of salt), has shown that cycling numbers in that stretch have actually grown in less than a year since installation. That's despite the fact that that it's only a few km and doesn't have many north-south connections. That last paragraph shows how little you understand about [utility cycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling). You think cycling is only for recreation and fun. Unfortunately, that's wrong but I don't blame you because that was traditionally the purpose of cycling in North America. Times are changing and more people are using their bikes (even e-bikes) for doing daily tasks. It'll only continue growing as more bike lanes are built. Also, we really underestimate how many trips are fairly short and don't carry much weight.
> This is 2024 where we have electric bikes that give us the pedal assist for when we're tired. Keep that in mind next time you choose a new commuter bike. I just wanted to jump in and say that if you've never used an electric bike, they're really neat and really change the physical approach to cycling. I am in, at best, mediocre shape. I rented one of the City's ebikes from around Islington Station and rode it to Bay/Queen. It took me about 43 minutes, including an awkward walk down a pedestrian area. By the time I got to the bike station, I was relaxed, comfortable, not overheating and not really sweating. I absolutely *flew* by the line of cars crossing the Humber. On the way back, I could definitely feel the burn riding up Bloor west of the Humber, but I was still moving at a decent pace. Honestly, it was such a game changer for me. I look forward to being able to afford one to own - It made my commute so much more pleasant.
I regularly pick up 40 lbs of groceries on a bicycle that weighs more than 40 lbs alone. The weight is not a problem whatsoever. Nor is rain. Truly heavy rain usually does not last more than 30 minutes, and light rain is a nothing-burger. And if you get wet, you're not made of sugar. And heat? Wear a t-shirt, go slow. It's not a race. No one expects anyone to regularly bike more than 5km one way. If it's a long distance, take public transit, or drive if the train/bus is inconvenient.
The bar owner had one good point just not the point he thought he was making. Just a handful of complaints can prevent something like his rooftop patio license. The city has long taught people that just a few local homeowners making a fuss overrule a city decision. Which is a terrible way to run a city. But now he's complaining about something and the city isn't bending over backwards to placate him.
I'm not gonna lie, I hate how bike lanes have turned into a culture war. It really doesn't have to be that way. I get it. People have concerns over traffic congestion but they act like bike lanes only benefit cyclists and do nothing else for a city. I think of bike lanes as a step towards better [road design](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) and road diet, something that Toronto desperately lacks even by North American standards of a major city. This isn't just for cyclists. It's for drivers too. 2 lanes designs are far more dangerous than 1 lane given the number of conflict points. We as a society really underestimate the value of road design. Almost all the time countless hours are spent investigating a crash on [who is at fault](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z31YZj1kwiA) rather than finding ways to design this for prevention and mitigation.
Don't listen, forge ahead. Be bold for once in your life, Toronto.
Once again the owners who are against the bike lanes don't fully understand that revenue for their businesses would eventually expand after their completion. It also helps foster a local community that creates cohesion between residents, shop owners and suppliers. Areas in the city that have safe bike lanes for people experiencing revenue stability because the cost of a bicycle is relatively cheap in comparison to a car especially when gas prices are going to be continued to be elevated unless gas prices go down over the next three decades. That's not going to happen by the way gas prices will continue to rise due to the catalyst material becoming more and more expensive. But to explain that to people is difficult. A better way of doing this is just by example. Roncesvalle (Roncy)- which has had bike lanes for nearly a decade is experiencing a stable local growth. A part of that is by fostering a community that allows for diverse transportation methods. Bloor West Village - also now beginning to experience a boom in stable local growth after the installation of bike lanes.
[удалено]
On the other hand, "huh, that looks neat, but there's no way I'm gonna go looking for parking right now."
Can someone please explain to me why people don’t want bike lanes? Like why is this a thing people oppose when it would arguably be a net positive for society
Ignoring all the carbrain comments, people have reasonable concerns against bike lanes: 1. Traffic congestion. Those people have no idea how traffic works. They think that adding a lane will improve traffic. BUT they also think that removing a lane will worsen traffic so everyone cannot move. This is the biggest reason. If they had space to drive around, it doesn't matter how many km of bike lanes exist. More of a personal commute reason. 2. Lack of knowledge about utility cycling. Many of the opposition are either non-cyclists or cyclists that only bike for fun/exercise/recreation. [Utility cycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling) is a completely foreign concept to many people in our North American society. Many people can't fathom biking to work, groceries, visit friends, short trips, errands, etc. As such, they do not see the potential for cycling. 3. TTC and public transit as a whole has severely lagged behind. They think that adding bike lanes is like an insult to a city building proper transportation. A lot of comments like "We should be improving TTC instead" show just how bad the TTC is. In reality however, bike lanes do not affect the development of new TTC projects. In fact, a lot of new lines opened are going to include complete streets (bike lanes) anyways. 4. Roads are almost never redesigned. Your average road on Toronto is 2-3 wide lanes each direction with absolutely no obstacles and intersection safety measures. See [stroads](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad). It's a very simple design that on paper looks very pretty to drive in. But causes a lot of hazards to all road users including drivers. If we had better advocacy for improved road design safety, we'd see way more support for bike lanes as many well designed roads across the world have cycling in mind. 5. Winters traditionally were fairly long. Back in what the 1970s, Toronto had really bad winters. It would snow into April (sometimes May). It's nothing like today's weather patterns where you're lucky to get more than 3 consecutive days of snow. It also doesn't help that Toronto is marketed as a cold city like other parts of Canada. Although to be fair, Ottawa/Montreal have bike lanes despite their colder weather patterns. It's just marketing is a huge one. 6. There's way too much car dependency relative to population density. Toronto might have a reliable TTC system. BUT if you were to scale it based on population density and compare similar densities in the world, Toronto has way too many cars for a city this large and dense. As such, it's very hard to convince people to *donate one lane* to cyclists. Not to mention how much on-street parking this city has. You don't see those people lobbying to remove on street parking to improve congestion. Overall, it's tradition and lack of development. The society is a product of Toronto taking forever to commit to change out of its car dependency ways.
It's change. Pure and simple. Traffic continues to be bad. The city continues to grow. Bike lanes are an identifiable change, so therefore they blame it on that. They're just railing against change, and the bike lanes are the easiest identifiable thing.
There is tons of parking around the Crooked Cue. If he had any brains he’d be pushing the city to fix the bike lanes by widening the sidewalk so he can add street-level seating. The “seniors need to cross safely” is bullshit. It’s actually safer to cross at corners now because of no right on red. And as if running across four lanes of traffic mid-block is safer than two. Finally, what hospital are they rushing to? The nearest one is 5km away with multiple routes.
if car lovers had any sense they'd pimp the fuck out of transit and bike lanes so they could have the road all to themselves, but instead the argue for the very thing that will keep congestion high.
Your argument has been valid for the last 50-70+ years of Toronto's history. Seriously. If car lovers truly understood how to reduce congestion, we would've seen Eglinton Crosstown done 15 years ago. They love to use "transit is more important" excuse yet had multiple decades to vote for that but still chose cars lol? Really baffling.
In the Danforth Corridor, drivers are 8% of people travelling through. EIGHT PERCENT. And we let these donkeys steer the conversation. 92% of Torontonians want their public spaces back for their benefit. Certainly not the storage of empty sheet metal boxes. Do we live in a democracy or an autocracy? Toronto.ca/DanforthStudy Example: https://imgur.com/gallery/0cG9Oky
> In the Danforth Corridor, drivers are 8% of people travelling through. EIGHT PERCENT. [This is in the link that you shared](https://i.imgur.com/5OdY1ko.png)
There’s a lot there at the website but that table is a classic car red herring: Here’s one of the display boards from the actual public consult: https://imgur.com/gallery/0cG9Oky Once seen, it cannot be unseen.
That's a completely different neighbourhood on the other end of the city.
Yes, inhabited by alien life forms and different color skies and one business selling oobleck!!! - but many of the same damned drivers demanding a private expressway.
No... inhabited by a lot more car-free students than the Danforth
You didn’t bother to define ‘that’s’
If drivers had to pay the true cost of driving they wouldn't be driving. We continue to subsidize a deeply harmful mode of transportation instead of investing in alternative modes of transportation.
As a driver this is engaging, i want more car lanes, and the right to drive my car on sidewalks if not through people and store fronts. The war on cars is a war on my freedumbs. Having said that i am looking forward to the bike lane construction in my area to be done, it will make it much more walkable, let alone safer.
I've taken to saying "if there is a war on cars, it's being fought in self-defense."
/r/Toronto and the Toronto Public Library encourage you to support local journalism if you are financially in a position to do so - otherwise, you can access many paywalled articles with a TPL card ([get a Digital Access card here](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/register/)) through the [TPL digital news resources](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/books-video-music/downloads-ebooks/digital-newspapers.jsp). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/toronto) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Pappas can’t understand how the city makes decisions — when 20 people complaining to the city were once able to prevent him from opening a rooftop patio but a petition with more than 13,000 names can’t persuade officials to rethink the bike lanes." Its a logical point, but maybe the lesson here is we should stop listening to NIMBYs about more things.
Redo all the roads and buildings, or make those futurama air travel pipes.
Bike lanes in downtown toronto makes sense 6 months a yr. The lanes get use in toronto BUT they are super ugly with the posts and crap. The street patios need to go. Make them stop. There is no need to dine on the road. Bike lanes should not be implemented in other cities as they just do not get any use. I live in hamilton and we are ALL commuting out of town and clogged up with new bike lanes for 1 guy on a scooter to use on random Tuesdays and a pelaton of suburbanites in search of good coffee on sundays.
If we have to tolerate some of the councils more deranged decisions, then at least they're also being pigheaded about this. We need more bikes and fewer cars and that's an end to it.
They did this in Brampton, all in the wrong spots. Some right turns are now single right turn instead of the dedicated right turn, causing congestion, disrupting flow. I haven't seen anyone use the bike lane. Brampton roads are not the safest for cycling to begin with.
Brampton is generally full of bad drivers so they wouldn't feel comfortable sharing the same road with drivers going 80 km/h on non-highways. Brampton would have to redesign roads completely so speeding this fast is difficult.
They've started putting speed bumps near school zones, but I see people just fly over them Dukes of Hazzard style.
Speed bumps are not enough. You need major overhauls to [road design](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_diet).
Cyclists in Toronto are a small and obnoxious minority. No one else wants our tax money going to fund bike lanes. The city is not designed for it, and has decent transit, which the cyclists also use, accompanied by their huge bikes. I would be happier if my taxes would eliminate all bike lanes. Cyclists should also be required to carry insurance, display a license plate, and follow the law. For yelling at and harassing kids, people with strollers, elderly people for getting in their way on shared urban pathways, and for punching and kicking cars, they should be charged. There are good people who cycle as well, but the aggressive, obnoxious ones really stand out. Cycling in a city not designed for it attracts antagonistic people with Bigorexia.
> Cyclists in Toronto are a small and obnoxious minority. And drivers aren't considered obnoxious? > The city is not designed for it, and has decent transit, which the cyclists also use, accompanied by their huge bikes. Amsterdam wasn't designed for cyclists back in 1970. In fact, it was designed very strongly for cars. Guess what? That all changed. Change doesn't happen overnight. You gotta start somewhere. > No one else wants our tax money going to fund bike lanes It only costs [$20M per year](https://dailyhive.com/toronto/toronto-add-100-km-new-bike-lanes) to fund bike lanes as of 2022. To put that into perspective, road repairs cost $500M total and that was using [2016](https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/05/03/are-drivers-paying-their-fair-share.html#:%7E:text=According%20to%20Steve%20Johnston%2C%20a,%24490%20million%20to%20%24510%20million.) numbers. The city would be saving a lot of money if more people biked. > Cyclists should also be required to carry insurance, display a license plate, and follow the law. If you want more cyclists to follow the laws, you should be wishing more bike lanes. Not less bike lanes. Lack of [safety](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBP2LTQxqZ8) is one of the biggest reasons cyclists violate laws. > There are good people who cycle as well, but the aggressive, obnoxious ones really stand out. You seem so concerned about obnoxious cyclists. Have you not considered how much worse drivers are in this city? My god you really are out of touch with what a good city looks like. Consider yourself lucky I even spent time responding to this comment. Most people wouldn't even read, let alone reply to such a comment to lecture you.
/r/Toronto and the Toronto Public Library encourage you to support local journalism if you are financially in a position to do so - otherwise, you can access many paywalled articles with a TPL card ([get a Digital Access card here](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/register/)) through the [TPL digital news resources](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/books-video-music/downloads-ebooks/digital-newspapers.jsp). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/toronto) if you have any questions or concerns.*
bro please no, traffic is already bad enough as it is. the Etobicoke part of bloor is backed up and that started as soon as they added the bike lanes out there
So get a bike. Or leave earlier
naw im good mate. id rather they have left it the same and just have people ride on the sidewalk. shit's fucked as it is. sometimes you cant leave earlier dummy, if it was all so simple, everybody would be doing it
> id rather they have left it the same and just have people ride on the sidewalk. Comments like this are exactly why our sidewalks are full of cyclists. Many people want fewer cyclists on the sidewalks but people like you are the reason why there are so many in sidewalks. The city should be doing its very best to reduce this, not ask cyclists to share with pedestrians.
Leave earlier
Have no problem sharing the road with bike. However, bike people really need to follow the rules and held responsible. What is the point of having a designated bike lane if you don’t use it
> What is the point of having a designated bike lane if you don’t use it Many people will use bike lanes if it's available. BUT it's also easy to notice cyclists that are outside of bike lanes. It could be a few reasons: 1. Too narrow and prefer to pass on the road (or worse sidewalk). 2. Most of the stretch is parked with cars. 3. Some bike lanes just start and end then restart for no reason. So some cyclists don't bother going in and out of bike lanes. 4. Uber Eats deliveries tend to promote sidewalk biking. 5. Some recreational cyclists tend to use roads because it's faster for speed. Though utility cyclists wouldn't.
Cars are parked in the bike lane
You're just not noticing or remembering the people you see using the bike lane. By a wide margin most of the bikes on roads where there is a decent bike lane are using it, the odd one not in the lane has a good reason as stated above and one time some speed demon was out of the bike lane wondering why your car was going so slow. And if it was me and it was one of those terrible painted bike lanes next to parking, I was on the edge of the bike lane because the bike lane is a door zone and I like my bones just the way they are.
As a cyclist, I loathe the idea of bike lanes in main arterial roads. However, the western part of Bloor from Islington to Runnymede as mentioned in the article doesn't have a straightforward east-west alternative, unlike east-end Danforth where there's Strathmore Blvd. from Donlands to Woodbine. (I take this route frequently.) I don't see an easy solution here that will make everyone happy. The current road design, where Bloor is the only practical road to cross the Humber River, means there is no other choice for the bike lanes.
> As a cyclist, I loathe the idea of bike lanes in main arterial roads. May I ask, what's the reason behind this?
Safety reasons. I do not feel safe on the arterial bike lanes in Scarborough because cars pass by at 70+ km/h. On the other end of the extreme, putting in a bike lane to reduce a 2-lane arterial road to 1 is also terrible. Dundas East through Regent Park is now a gridlock nightmare because there's only 1 lane there, and it's also a streetcar route. The bike lane on Dundas East has made the situation much worse. I believe this is the situation with Bloor as well. I use bike lanes all the time and think they're fantastic when implemented properly. But so many aren't. The Richmond bike lane is great. The Adelaide bike lane isn't because someone came up with the idiotic idea of moving it to the left side of the road, and drivers aren't used to that. I have seen a bike-car collision at Adelaide and Jarvis.
> Safety reasons. I do not feel safe on the arterial bike lanes in Scarborough because cars pass by at 70+ km/h. Scarborough here. I totally agree. I can't be asked to bike on the road which is why IF and that's a big IF I were to bike, it would be on the sidewalk. Since it's illegal, I don't bike at all. I do wish there were bike lanes and complete [road designs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_diet) that cause people to drive slower. > On the other end of the extreme, putting in a bike lane to reduce a 2-lane arterial road to 1 is also terrible. [Studies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) have shown that 2 lane roads are worse road design than 1 lane roads. > Dundas East through Regent Park is now a gridlock nightmare because there's only 1 lane there, and it's also a streetcar route. The bike lane on Dundas East has made the situation much worse Congestion is not caused by the lack of lanes or cyclists. It's caused because there are too many drivers. The best way to relieve congestion is by reducing the number of total cars. And that can be done by providing people alternatives to driving. Even a 10% decrease in car traffic can go a long ways. Look at this [chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car-free_movement#/media/File:Passenger_Capacity_of_different_Transport_Modes.png) to give you an idea of how much space a single occupant car takes up per person. I strongly suggest you study the concept of [induced demand in inverse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#Reduced_demand_(the_inverse_effect)). This will explain a lot better than me. > I believe this is the situation with Bloor as well. Luckily for you, a group of volunteers did a [study](https://old.reddit.com/r/torontobiking/comments/1d2yybl/new_bloor_bike_counts_from_tcbc/) showing the cycling growth after less than a year since Bloor Bike lanes were installed. That's remarkable despite most not having North-South connections and only being a few km long. > I use bike lanes all the time and think they're fantastic when implemented properly. But so many aren't. The Richmond bike lane is great. Bike lanes can always be improved. You're correct that many bike lanes aren't great but that's largely because we give so much road space to drivers and our designs are focused on inconveniencing them the least amount possible as opposed to safety.
>[Studies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) have shown that 2 lane roads are worse road design than 1 lane roads. > Thats only because the one lane road design has a center lane and is largely stroads with minimal turns. Entirely different than dundas which is a major street with many intersections and turns and no center lane. They literally had to remove the brimley bike lane because it caused so much traffic being a 2 lane road. Its 4 lanes and is back to normal.
Are you seriously trying to lecture a cyclist on traffic patterns using videos which could be easily disproven with real camera footage from the problem locations? I could put up a tripod at Sumach and Dundas East, where it is 1 lane, and show how silly this "too many drivers" hypothesis is. But all you need to see is how sections of the Gardiner Expressway have recently been reduced to 1 lane to know how crippling it is. A 3-lane Gardiner wouldn't magically solve everything, but it'd certainly be better than the 1-lane Gardiner we have right now.
As someone who used to cycle in regent park, every time they tried to “improve” the cycling network they made it shittier to live there. Things like closing Bayview for activeTO when there’s literally a nicer bike lane that follows the don valley is a great example. The point of bike infrastructure is so that people have an alternative to driving. The way it is being used is to enforce an ideological outcome, and big surprise, people don’t like that.
Your argument for reducing a street to one lane because of bike lanes is nonsensical When there would just be parked cars and effectively making it a one lane street anyways without bike lanes.
[удалено]
Those are huge detours, and it's like asking someone to go from Bloor to Queens Quay because the Martin Goodman bike lane is fast and clear. I remember when people protested the removal of the Jarvis bike lane, saying that a _one-road detour_ to Sherbourne was too much of a hassle. Those people would never detour to St. Clair or Queensway. The only alternative to cross Humber River is Old Mill Road, but the uphill climb there is too much of a struggle for those without e-bikes. And conversely, the downhill slope is daunting and dangerous.
> As a cyclist, I loathe the idea of bike lanes in main arterial roads. Out in Etobicoke, one of the main challenges is that natural or manmade features mean that not just the most direct way, but often the *only* way between two points is through an arterial - the Humber, the hydro field, the hydro station, the creeks, meandering streets, etc. We're in desperate need of a connected cycling network, and we have lots of space to implement separated lanes safely, but many of the direct routes are arterials. Islington and Kipling are solid N-S choices, and there isn't much else that isn't a meandering route on side streets where the city will only give sharrows at best. Rathburn Road is a weird one. East of Martin Grove, it's a strip of paint. Traffic doesn't move THAT quickly, but you're still close to it. West of Martin Grove, there's a large painted buffer between the lane and the vehicle lane, and it's NIGHT AND DAY. It's so much nicer cycling west of Martin Grove than east.
stupidest implementation of bike lanes ever. absolutely crushing the neighbourhood with traffic jams. it's intolerable for locals.
You're kidding right? You don't think traffic jam is caused by cars? Or that locals are more likely to walk/bike to their local destinations?
you obviously havent even gone to look at this implementation have you? you obviously dont undertand what happens when you reduce a major artery from 2 lanes to 1 lane. sigh. this is what sensible people are up against. a cyclist mafia that thrives on its own ignorant self-righteousness.
Actually, I have. I have seen this myself when I visit those areas. In fact, I also watch videos like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs7jHvh7v-4) that have shown that on average, 1 lane is way better than 2 lanes.
lies bro!
Leave earlier or ride your bike. No one promised you light traffic
Subways subways subways. Way fewer people would opt to drive/bus/bike/walk if subways were developed like a proper mega city.
And you haven't considered cycling as a form of commute? Every mega city has but why not Toronto?
I personally have. Realistically, you'd be naive to think the average person would opt to bike over driving/subway/bus/uber even if the roads were made safer for bikers -- especially in temperate climates like Canada where the weather is highly variable. Also, don't forget about the bike theft orgs. Many Asian mega cities have always relied mainly on cycling to the point where cyclists and e-cyclists completely flooded the streets for both cars and pedestrians alike. Modern day advancements in their subway systems greatly alleviated this problem. So, 0/2.
> Realistically, you'd be naive to think the average person would opt to bike over driving/subway/bus/uber even if the roads were made safer for bikers How do we know that? I mean Toronto hasn't built bike infrastructure in a grand scale until lately. And despite all its bike infrastructure shortcomings, BikeShare has recently broke a [record](https://www.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/1di83xn/bike_share_toronto_bikeshareto_on_x_were_breaking/?rdt=41390). And it's already started growing since [2019](https://old.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/18ar8xa/some_graphs_i_made_showing_the_growth_of_bike/). Obviously at the end of the day we shouldn't expect bikes to completely replace cars but at least having this option available to us is important. > especially in temperate climates like Canada where the weather is highly variable. Ottawa/Montreal have even more extreme climates. Yet that didn't stop them from consistently building bike lanes. > Also, don't forget about the bike theft orgs. Sure I'll give you that but we have an expanding BikeShare program. > Many Asian mega cities have always relied mainly on cycling to the point where cyclists and e-cyclists completely flooded the streets for both cars and pedestrians alike Do you even know how little space bikes take up? Perhaps you should look a this [chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car-free_movement#/media/File:Passenger_Capacity_of_different_Transport_Modes.png) should give you an idea. You should be thankful that for every bike, there's 1 less car on the road. > Modern day advancements in their subway systems greatly alleviated this problem. Building bike lanes do not impede the progress of subways being built. In fact, a lot of the new subway lines include bike lanes on their street.
Bike license and have bikers pay for the lane and expansion, everyone can be equally miserable.