News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

Also, degrees of latitude north, comparatively:

Montreal: 45
London: 51
Amsterdam: 52
Copenhagen: 55
Oslo: 59
Helsinki: 60
Toronto: 43

#ItsGettinHotInHere

That is seriously misleading because ocean currents make those cities in Europe warmer despite being at higher latitudes.
 
LOL ocean currents. That's a new one in the anti-bike safety toolbox.
And when you point out to people like Andrew how absurd their comments are they disappear, only to reappear a month or so later to repeat the same tired arguments. They're again proven wrong, disappear, rinse, repeat.

Minneapolis has also made great strides with their bike network and is colder than Toronto. Ditto Ottawa. And if small cities count, Peterborough.
 
That is seriously misleading because ocean currents make those cities in Europe warmer despite being at higher latitudes.

Good morning,
You're absolutely right, it is misleading to rely solely on latitudes due to the Atlantic Gulf Stream.
That is why a city like Toronto is much colder than the French Riviera even though it is situated on roughly the same latitude, and therefore you were right to object to the quoted cities mentioned like London, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen.
Not all of Europe is warmer than North America though. If you go north far enough in Europe, you will start to approach Toronto's climate, and that's where Helsinki, Oslo, and also Stockholm come in. Imagine a kind of sloped/diagonal latitude as opposed to a horizontal one.
 
And to complicate the "ocean currents" claim even further, that has now been discounted. It was, after all, only a theory all these years with no proof. It's prevailing winds, the best theory being that they originate in North Am (Globe's rotation besides). In the event, the whole "we're so much colder" argument is baseless. There's cities in the north of Sweden and Finland with better cycling infrastructure and support.
 
What's the point of that? Corley Avenue doesn't go anywhere. Wouldn't it make more sense to build bike lanes that connect Woodbine to the existing Dundas bike lanes or the Martin Goodman Trail?
 
What's the point of that? Corley Avenue doesn't go anywhere. Wouldn't it make more sense to build bike lanes that connect Woodbine to the existing Dundas bike lanes or the Martin Goodman Trail?

My guess is to make it easier and safer for kids biking to the school on Corley Avenue.
 
My guess is to make it easier and safer for kids biking to the school on Corley Avenue.

That shouldn't be a priority for the city. Kids 14 and under are allowed to bike on sidewalks. It makes a lot more sense IMO to not have an awkward gap between Dundas, Woodbine and the Waterfront Trail.

It connects Eastwood Avenue and Gerrard Street to Kingston Road.

Can you clarify this? Kingston and Gerrard are already connected to Woodbine, neither of those have bike lanes, and Corley Avenue doesn't intersect either of them. Eastwood Avenue is 4 km east of Woodbine.
 
Can you clarify this? Kingston and Gerrard are already connected to Woodbine, neither of those have bike lanes, and Corley Avenue doesn't intersect either of them. Eastwood Avenue is 4 km east of Woodbine.

Here is a map of how the Corley bike lane fits within the greater cycling network plan. Chorley is a one way street, so what council approved today is a contra-flow bike lane that would allow cyclists to travel in either direction. Council also approved separated bike lanes on Woodbine Ave.



Untitled.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    238.8 KB · Views: 690

Back
Top