[txlseries4]

The bike lanes get a mention in the 2025 budget, which Matt Elliott characterized as language that "feels a bit softer than the past anti-bike rhetoric, but this is still very bad, obviously". I forget who but saw a journalist speculate that for bike lanes to be included in the budget the gov must know that removals are going to cost a decent sum, but who knows. I'm assuming that details about how to measure "significant impact" still haven't been given to municipalities.

Reconfiguring Roads and Bike Lanes
The Reducing Gridlock and Saving You Time Act requires prescribed municipalities to receive approval from the province before installing new bike lanes that would result in the removal of lanes for traffic. Municipalities are required to demonstrate that the proposed bike lanes will not have a significant impact on vehicle traffic.

Ontario is reconfiguring some of Toronto’s most congested streets. The government is working to reinstate vehicle lanes on Bloor Street West, Yonge Street, University Avenue, Avenue Road and Queen’s Park Crescent, while maintaining bike lanes where possible or moving them to secondary roads.

Budget PDF (page 108)

 

[Northern Light]

I wasn't campaigning against the Marlee bike lane, or the Beltline connection to be clear. I like what I've read about those. I was just wondering if there were better ways to get from Lawrence to Eglinton on your way to the lake than Marlee.

As requested, I examined the east side of The Allen, with an eye to building a 4M wide multi-use path. I generally assumed that I did not have to provide for landscaping, but that I would not remove an existing row of mature trees.

I find that to have a continuous (zero gap), 4M wide trail, without removing a significant number of mature trees would require the partial or full taking of 16 properties. There are 2-4 where it might be feasible to just move a fence over by ~2 meters and/or to remove (and possibly relocate a free standing garage or out-building. The remaining properties would be would whole takes.

I think you would be looking at 22-28M in acquisition costs, and another 3M in demo, before trail construction.

A few notable pinch points:

No trail here, road is very narrow as is, no existing sidewalk, one of the 2 houses must go.

Below, I show a pinch point that is 3.2M wide. The adjacent home would have to go.

Just north of that the available space from the curb to the fence above the Allen embankment is under 3.0M.

The road cannot be narrowed sufficiently, one home would have to go to allow re-alignment of the road and sufficient minimum width.

Next, no trail here, or room, 2 lots required:

I'll leave it at that for now. Needless to say, a very expensive options.

 

[Sauga89]

As requested, I examined the east side of The Allen, with an eye to building a 4M wide multi-use path. I generally assumed that I did not have to provide for landscaping, but that I would not remove an existing row of mature trees.

I find that to have a continuous (zero gap), 4M wide trail, without removing a significant number of mature trees would require the partial or full taking of 16 properties. There are 2-4 where it might be feasible to just move a fence over by ~2 meters and/or to remove (and possibly relocate a free standing garage or out-building. The remaining properties would be would whole takes.

I think you would be looking at 22-28M in acquisition costs, and another 3M in demo, before trail construction.

A few notable pinch points:

View attachment 651675

No trail here, road is very narrow as is, no existing sidewalk, one of the 2 houses must go.

Below, I show a pinch point that is 3.2M wide. The adjacent home would have to go.

View attachment 651676

Just north of that the available space from the curb to the fence above the Allen embankment is under 3.0M.

The road cannot be narrowed sufficiently, one home would have to go to allow re-alignment of the road and sufficient minimum width.

View attachment 651677

Next, no trail here, or room, 2 lots required:

View attachment 651678

I'll leave it at that for now. Needless to say, a very expensive options.

I looked at those pinch points too. The first one, I thought the trail could just go on the street past that one house, because it's only one driveway. I did wonder if the others were a bit tight, but I thought maybe the noise wall could be moved a metre over in those short sections. I didn't worry about the trees, but I guess I should have. Also, I thought maybe that last empty lot was city parkland since there isn't a house on it. I know that you know way more about this than me though, so I trust your judgement. Thanks for looking it over.

 

[just east of the creek]

I'll be there next week. Cycling in Montréal in summer always feels so easy-breezy, if not a little bumpy.

In Toronto I bike a lot and always feel like I'm personally instigating a culture war against d***h***ds like Ford. Drivers here are just so aggressive around bikes.

I agree. I am a car/truck driver for a number of reasons, and my recent experiences with biking in central T.O. are now becoming dated as I have moved. But the experience here in Montreal as a cyclist is rejuvenating. And as a driver, the fact that your right turn option on red, and on a blinking green, is not possible, does ease the stress for all using that intersection.

Car driving aggressiveness and entitlement needs to be taken down a notch or several in Ontario. Perhaps it is a cultural thing, perhaps a varying political outlook, but Ontario governments are surely not fully on the same page as a good % of urbanized Ontarian's where the zoning is not single family dwelling. This has to change.

 

[Mihairokov]

Car driving aggressiveness and entitlement needs to be taken down a notch or several in Ontario. Perhaps it is a cultural thing, perhaps a varying political outlook, but Ontario governments are surely not fully on the same page as a good % of urbanized Ontarian's where the zoning is not single family dwelling. This has to change.

Driving culturally in Canada leads to this strange aggression over all over road users. I don't know if it's a distance/time sunk cost fallacy of being in a car but the aggressiveness is over the top, especially in tight urban areas where they shouldn't have the reins whatsoever. The only way to fix this is to remove cars from the equation totally, because motorists will always look for ways to flex rules and act selfishly at this expense of all others.

 

[evandyk]

We could use road design to cut down on the tendency towards aggressiveness. For example, I cross Front St between RBP/RY and Union Station all the time on foot. The road design clearly indicates that the space is shared, and drivers almost always drive slowly, attentively, and yield the right of way to people walking across.

It would be better with no cars, but the way it is designed promotes cooperation rather than aggressiveness. But go east of Bay St and the road is designed like a highway, and people drive like it's one.

 

[just east of the creek]

I think I have expressed these thoughts elsewhere on some threads, so apologies if this is repetitive. But I am really in favour of neighbourhoods, the scale of the buildings, and the way the street interacts with pedestrians, cyclists......and at some point service vehicles, and cars. I have had a longterm ability through my job to experience cities in Europe, Scandinavia, Korea, China etc. And I know this has influenced how I think.

I am not sure that banning cars in a large scale urban area is possible, or something we wish. Cars are cars and there is a utility factor to their use, especially until your rapid, relatively clean, non-encampment (I say with caution as it is a flash point, but also a negative determinant to transit usage), pretty frequent, short and longer distance transit options are more fully utilized (i am speaking of Toronto). In some areas of where I am currently in Montreal, you do find some shorter streets permanently shut down (and I am told more will be added, there is a list apparently) and used to extend cycle and pedestrian access and park areas. Road design, neighbourhood design can be a huge part of this, and I think the various threads on UT are full of ideas, concepts and examples of this type of thinking and planning.

I think part of the issue with aggressiveness with car drivers is the size, power, and capabilities of cars, and the same for trucks. And the ability of a very large % of the population to finance a large amount of capital to purchase these vehicles. To date there is not an electrical version of a Honda CIvic or a Nissan Versa, but there are multiple examples of electrical powered vehicles that will get to 100 kmh in under 6 seconds. What capabilities do we actually need here? Judging by the number of Nissan Versa's, Honda Civics and Toyota Corolla's, we need an affordable electrical Civic.

I learned to drive on a Ford F100 'three on the tree' at the farm. The farm truck is now an F350 which would dwarf an F100 in size, cost oodles of cash, tows the barn (if we needed it too), has far too much capabilities for almost 100% of what we need it for, and is just a pain in the ass to drive into Toronto whenever we have to tow into the Royal. And you find these same trucks all over now, production is at an alltime high, and they are a 'commuter' vehicles of choice. Why are trucks the largest sellers by number in Canada? They outsell cars at a 4 to 1 margin (or thereabouts) consume far more, emit far more, and you require a stepladder to get into them.

So this section of the car culture is strong, pervasive and politically aligned with a more right wing, me first point of view. And Doug Ford feeds off of this. There is going to be a need for long term political activity to counter the car first at all costs movement. I guess the current examples are the anti bike lane legislation and Marlee?

Anyways, enough of me for now. Time to go find a Bixie and then a cappuccino.

@Northern Light . I trust you have your planting well underway. Cheers.

 

[robmausser]

The only thing I am in favour of this is that as far as the Beltline trail is considered, I firmly believe they should close down Aldburn Road bridge to traffic and use that as a dedicated crossing for the Beltline. Whether or not they continue to put bike lanes on Elm Ridge etc, is irrelevant to me. But the Beltline should have a more dedicated crossing completely separate from cars, and the Aldburn Road bridge completely doesn't need to exist; both sides of it are easily accessible from Eglinton without it and its not a through street. I'm frankly amazed it was built in the first place but we have a good opportunity to repurpose it now.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Municipalities are required to demonstrate that the proposed bike lanes will not have a significant impact on vehicle traffic.

If only that had been the policy a decade or more ago when we were designing and installing bike lanes. I assume we’d see narrower or reconfigured sidewalks, reduction in all day on-street parking (and dineTO lane closures), and perhaps adjustments in traffic signals and left/right turns to keep vehicle traffic moving. Perhaps separated bike lanes would go onto fewer but heavy volume/commuter focused routes.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

What is the definition of "roads" or public highways under "common law"?

"Under English common law, public highways allow all members of the public to pass and repass without hindrance. The right to use a highway is established through dedication by the landowner or through long-standing public use. This right extends to walking, riding, or driving vehicles, as long as it's physically possible and subject to municipal regulations."

Note the "subject to municipal regulations" part.

 

[evandyk]

If only that had been the policy a decade or more ago when we were designing and installing bike lanes. I assume we’d see narrower or reconfigured sidewalks, reduction in all day on-street parking (and dineTO lane closures), and perhaps adjustments in traffic signals and left/right turns to keep vehicle traffic moving. Perhaps separated bike lanes would go onto fewer but heavy volume/commuter focused routes.

Or maybe they'd look at the impact of installing a bike lane, then say "Well, we accept a much greater impact on congestion constantly from building construction sites and other projects. In that context, these bike lanes are a tiny drop in the bucket, so given the major benefits, we'll move forward with this."

In any serious analysis of congestion in the city, bike lanes are not a real factor.

 

[DSCToronto]

In any serious analysis of congestion in the city, bike lanes are not a real factor.

THAT is the real argument but, as we know, Doug has little interest in facts or proper analysis - he decides based on his gut and we all know where that has got us so far.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

THAT is the real argument but, as we know, Doug has little interest in facts or proper analysis - he decides based on his gut and we all know where that has got us so far.

"Ford defends bill that would prevent injured cyclists from suing Ontario over bike lane removal. Amendments to Bill 212 would make it so people could no longer sue the government if they are hurt on roadways as a result of bike lanes being taken out."

 

[Admiral Beez]

Or maybe they'd look at the impact of installing a bike lane, then say "Well, we accept a much greater impact on congestion constantly from building construction sites and other projects. In that context, these bike lanes are a tiny drop in the bucket, so given the major benefits, we'll move forward with this."

In any serious analysis of congestion in the city, bike lanes are not a real factor.

Well, isn’t it the City that’s issuing the permits for blocking lanes (and sidewalks) for construction? If so, the city again is to blame for congestion.

 

[evandyk]

I blame drivers for congestion. Sadly, nobody seems to be interested in reducing the number of them, they just redirect them around the map in the hope that somehow it will make things move faster.