[interchange42]

BicycleDutch, the creator of that video, BTW, is a great YouTube channel, in case you don't subscribe to it already.

42

 

[steveintoronto]

We'll have to wait decades before this happens. Forcing motorists to YIELD to bicycles.

I have serious doubts that it will ever happen, and cyclists themselves are partly to blame.

I've been doing the rail-trails twice a week for the last couple of months. I might detail routings and GO access to them later, but since hardly anyone seems to use them as intended, I seriously question the impetus of Canadians claiming to want more infrastructure. On average, on trails 50km or more in length, typically I'll pass less than five or so other cyclists in runs over the length, and even then mostly only adjacent to urban areas.

I arrived back into Toronto yesterday late afternoon, and was again appalled at the cycling habits of many. Flagrant, rampant red-light running, ignoring stop signs, grabbing lanes without looking, swerving within the lanes, zooming out from between parked cars, and passing on the right, sometimes going up on the sidewalk to do it. Crosswalks are hardly ever respected, or stopped streetcars with open doors.

When Canadians (especially Torontonians) conduct themselves like I see in the Dutch vids, then they'll deserve to have infrastructure to suit their needs. I see very few cyclists here that are up to the task. Time and again, I'll blow past all the wannabe jocks, only for me to observe all the rules of the road, and them to ignore them, putting not only their safety and that of pedestrians at risk, but my safety too. You'd think that they'd realize I'm slowing down for stops not because I'm slow (I can wheelie in the lowest two gears without getting off the saddle), but because protocol and safety require it, and for them not to swerve in front of me, many times from the right side, to block my ability to accelerate from the stop. Most of them haven't a clue as to how to gear down before stopping, but hey.

Holland this isn't. Unfortunately.

Globe and Mail has a write-up today:
New Bloor bike lanes in Toronto must pass ‘rigorous’ tests
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nto-must-pass-rigorous-tests/article31383524/

And by my terms and those of others, cyclists have to prove themselves, as much as the infrastructure. So far, most cyclists I observe would fail.
(I haven't owned a vehicle in decades, used to drive cab, motorbike and truck in the city)(I've lived in a number of US and European cities and cycled since)

Best that the Facebook group linked by Salsa start coaching cyclists on that point, or this project will be termed a failure.

 

[ShonTron]

I have serious doubts that it will ever happen, and cyclists themselves are partly to blame.

...



When Canadians (especially Torontonians) conduct themselves like I see in the Dutch vids, then they'll deserve to have infrastructure to suit their needs. I see very few cyclists here that are up to the task. Time and again, I'll blow past all the wannabe jocks, only for me to observe all the rules of the road, and them to ignore them, putting not only their safety and that of pedestrians at risk, but my safety too. You'd think that they'd realize I'm slowing down for stops not because I'm slow (I can wheelie in the lowest two gears without getting off the saddle), but because protocol and safety require it, and for them not to swerve in front of me, many times from the right side, to block my ability to accelerate from the stop. Most of them haven't a clue as to how to gear down before stopping, but hey.

Sigh. This is the type of argument that anti-cycling politicians crave. Paint all cyclists (except yourself, of course) with one stroke, then say nobody can enjoy safe, effective infrastructure until *they* start following the rules.

Why should motorists get to keep an unnecessary and expensive East Gardiner when they run red lights and disappearing turn signals, don't stop on red lights before turning right, go over the speed limit, operate without full head/tail lights at night?

 

[steveintoronto]

Sigh. This is the type of argument that anti-cycling politicians crave. Paint all cyclists (except yourself, of course) with one stroke, then say nobody can enjoy safe, effective infrastructure until *they* start following the rules.

Why should motorists get to keep an unnecessary and expensive East Gardiner when they run red lights and disappearing turn signals, don't stop on red lights before turning right, go over the speed limit, operate without full head/tail lights at night?

I'm not begrudging cyclists anything, my point should be clear: From *their* (the powers that be) viewpoint, if cyclists don't make this work by 'playing the game', then they'll jump on that as their first excuse.

"Backlash" is routine for this. I'm on record in this forum (I was just reading back) that I was initially "jaded" that this will work. I'm still skeptical! Cyclists must do their part to make it work, and that's by observing the rules of the road.

Cyclists in this town are hardly noted by the majority of citizens as being logical, let alone abiding by the rules. If motorists en masse acted the way most Toronto cyclists act, powered vehicles never would have been allowed on the roads. Horse and buggy would still be the norm.

Mark my word, the press is going to be all over the *behaviour* of cyclists on that stretch. It's nothing to do with me, or you. It's to do with how the majority, and local businesses react to this.

Stand at a busy corner on any major street in this city, and watch, detaching yourself from your own bias. Now tell me many if not most cyclists aren't acting recklessly. One only has to watch how the *social norms* in Denmark and Holland are reflected in their cycling protocol. Cyclists there, as amply demonstrated in the many vids posted, conduct a choreographed dance of grace and and rhythm. Toronto is the worst city I've ever witnessed for bad cycling. It's not even just a case of 'following protocol'. It's a case of common-sense.

Paint all cyclists (except yourself, of course)

Best you re-read what I wrote, and read accurately. I never stated that. I stand behind what I did state, and that is that the *majority* of cyclists don't observe established cycling protocol.

Some do, and they're the minority. Some are fastidious. Your inability to accurately observe, let alone quote, is showing.

Why should motorists get to keep an unnecessary and expensive East Gardiner when they run red lights and disappearing turn signals, don't stop on red lights before turning right, go over the speed limit, operate without full head/tail lights at night?

That's a very immature vector of argument.

If motorists acted like many cyclists do, and got caught, they'd be banned from driving.

So when's the last time you saw the majority of drivers at a red light drive through it? How many drivers go flying past stopped streetcars, up on the sidewalk in some cases, and through crosswalks?

Your comparison is absurd. Never for a moment have I insinuated Toronto drivers are angels, in fact, Ontario drivers are rated poorly by a number of observers, myself included. I certainly don't miss driving in this jurisdiction, but that does not absolve idiot cyclists from their actions.

I see *mass* red-light jumping at downtown intersections. One does it, and most follow in many cases. If you haven't seen, then you sir, are blind.

Cyclists have created a PR nightmare in this city. Living in denial of it only exacerbates the extent of the challenge.

 

[steveintoronto]

TorStar has an article just up on Bloor lanes:

[...]
Mayor John Tory has backed the $500,000 pilot, but he has also been clear that if the evaluation isn’t favourable, he won’t hesitate to push for the lanes to be removed.

“I’m going to be certainly wanting to see that it’s measured rigorously,” he told council May 4. “If the measurements show overall, taken overall as a whole, this was bad for neighbourhoods, bad for business . . . then I will be advocating it be taken out.”

Jacquelyn Hayward Gulati, the city’s manager of cycling infrastructure, said Bloor’s importance as both a retail strip and arterial road, as well as the decades-long debate about whether it’s suitable for bike infrastructure, means “we need to be extremely thorough about whether this pilot project is effective or not.”

The methodology the transportation department will use for the evaluation, which Gulati said will cost $40,000, is based in part on guidelines published by New York City and the U.S. Department of Transportation, and involves measuring everything from car and cycling traffic patterns, availability of on- and off-street parking, trends in local retail sales and public support.

Three rounds of study are planned: one, to collect baseline data, was completed earlier this year, and two more are planned for this fall and June 2017.

The results will be included in a report to the public-works committee in the third quarter of next year, along with a recommendation on whether the pilot project should be “maintained, modified or removed.”

In a departure from previous bike lane studies, transportation staff won’t just be looking at Bloor. They’ll also study bicycle and motor vehicle patterns on the parallel roads of Dupont St. and Harbord St., as well as monitoring local side streets for traffic “infiltration.”

According to Gulati, in a first for Toronto, the city will use 23 cameras set up on Bloor, Harbord, and Dupont, to automatically produce bicycle and motor vehicle counts. In total, she said, almost 5,000 hours of traffic footage will be analyzed.

The city has also contracted a consultant to perform “travel time runs” on the three parallel streets, which will involve using car-mounted GPS trackers to measure how long it takes to drive from one end to the other.

One aspect of the lanes the city can’t measure directly, according to Gulati, is their effect on cyclist safety. That’s because it usually takes about three years to collect reliable traffic collision data and “it’s difficult over a one-year pilot project to come to conclusions about safety.” However, the city will perform intercept surveys that will ask riders if they feel safer in the lanes.

Local Councillor Joe Cressy (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina), who has been a strong proponent of the pilot project, acknowledged that with so much data being collected it will be easy for the bike lane’s critics to “choose the numbers that suit their argument” and some will focus only on how the lanes affect car travel times. But he stressed that the “complete package” of information should be considered.[...]

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/08/12/new-bike-lanes-not-carved-in-stone.html

 

[W. K. Lis]

Focus on Deputy Mayor Denzil Minnan-Wong. He's the arch-villain fighting against us getting the needed bicycle infrastructure done, and especially in keeping them. He lead the Ford Empire forces against the Jarvis Street bicycle lanes and had them removed after two years.

Deputy Mayor Denzil Minnan-Wong​

 

[amnesiajune]

Minnan-Wong voted in favour of the Bloor Street bike lane pilot project:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2016/05/04/city-council-debates-bloor-st-bike-lane-plan.html

He also voted in favour of the 10-year master plan. Only Mammoloti and Holyday voted against that, and Kagyiannis voted for the 10-year plan but not for the Bloor Street pilot:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...uble-size-of-city-s-cycling-network-1.3625252

 

[steveintoronto]

Minnan-Wong voted in favour of the Bloor Street bike lane pilot project:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2016/05/04/city-council-debates-bloor-st-bike-lane-plan.html

He also voted in favour of the 10-year master plan. Only Mammoloti and Holyday voted against that, and Kagyiannis voted for the 10-year plan but not for the Bloor Street pilot:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...uble-size-of-city-s-cycling-network-1.3625252

Yeah, I was about to correct that too, thanks for setting the record straight, but it underlines how fragile some of the support for this is, and how necessary it's going to be to *shepherd* this at City Hall.

I've had a differing opinion on Toronto cyclist behaviour with ShonTron, but it's *essential* that Cycle Toronto have 'coaches' along that stretch to point out to cyclists, pedestrians and motorists alike that this is going to be pounced upon by negative forces unless decorum is observed. And it's time for conscientious cyclists to point that out to other cyclists flagrantly giving us all a bad rap.

Part of the "experiment" is proving that protocol can and must be followed. Forces aligned against the Bloor lanes will have no problem photographing and vidding gross offences. I'm just about to cycle along Bloor now to that section to get a first-hand look at what's going right, and what's going wrong.

As for drivers:

Philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre said, "Hell is other people." If he drove in the GTA, he might have said, "Hell is other drivers."

If you think we get more than our fair share of the unsafe and the incompetent on the roads in our neck of the woods, you're apparently right. A recent study by Allstate Insurance found GTA drivers are the most unsafe in Ontario.

The study looked at accident rates per 100 cars across the province over a three-year period and the GTA's communities came out on the rock bottom.

What's really striking is that four of the worst 10 records were found in the GTA North; Thornhill (with the worst accident record in Ontario), Maple, Richmond Hill and Concord.

Now, you'd expect the region with the most and busiest highways to have more accidents, but what's the deal with the north end? Why does Thornhill, at 6.6 accidents per 100 cars, have so many more crashes than Toronto, at 5.6? Why does little Maple, with about 50,000 people, rank five spots worse than Mississauga with nearly 700,000 souls?

Here's where the story gets interesting and, potentially, politically touchy.

Allstate says it just works up the numbers, hoping to prompt a public dialogue on driver safety, and doesn't have the expertise to analyze the causes. Allstate's Manager of External Affairs, Tony Irwin, says they might get into analysis sometime in the future, but for now, "Folks are going to interpret it as they will."

Public transit

Some Thornhill politicians have jumped on the study as proof they need more public transit (i.e. the Yonge St. subway extension) to help reduce the massive volume of commuters. Or, as evidence the area needs more and better roads and traffic management systems. Or both.

One thing's for sure, councillors in both Thornhill and Richmond Hill get a constant earful from their constituents about both traffic volume and bad driving. Residents will tell you they see way too many unsafe drivers, particularly on residential streets.

So, the 800 kilo gorilla in the room is the basic question - what about the drivers themselves? Is there something wrong with GTA North inhabitants when it comes to getting behind the wheel?

I've heard people (who should know better) make the racist argument it is the high percentage of Asian people in Thornhill and Richmond Hill that drive the accident rates up. One person even told me the large number of elderly Jewish people in the area didn't help either.

Repeating the old stereotype that Asians (and elderly Jews) are inherently bad drivers is not only insulting, it makes no sense.

Maple is not known for its Jewish or Asian communities, but still ranks third-worst in Ontario. Markham, which does have many Jews and Asians, ranks six places better than mostly Italian Woodbridge. So, it's not specific ethnicity.

It could be a combination of factors, perhaps including people's age or the percentage of recent immigrants adjusting to driving here. We just don't know. But we should find out.

Whether it's lack of transit, types of residents, state of the roads or what's in the drinking water, knowing why GTA North drivers have more accidents could help prevent those accidents.

Let's not allow political correctness, or fear of what we might learn, stop us from saving lives. Over to you, Ministry of Transportation .

- Stone lives in Thornhill and at www.GhostWriterInTheSky.ca

How are cyclists in Toronto scored? I know my impression, anyone have some reference? Let's not maintain the same ranking as drivers have. Perhaps it is socially ingrained?

 

[salsa]

Minnan-Wong voted in favour of the Bloor Street bike lane pilot project:

He also voted in favour of the 10-year master plan. Only Mammoloti and Holyday voted against that, and Kagyiannis voted for the 10-year plan but not for the Bloor Street pilot:

One day, after the lanes prove to be an overwhelming success and then permanently expanded across the whole city, these three councillors will look like utter fools for opposing this. They have absolutely no vision for anything beyond maintaining the status quo.

 

[Lumber King]

Lanes should stay, no question about it.

 

[salsa]

I have to say that I am very impressed with the bike lanes, and it was encouraging to see that so many cyclists are already using them. Photos from this morning:

Where the buffer it at least a foot wide, it would be a good idea to put planter boxes along it (example: Simcoe St). I wouldn't be surprised if the BIA is already working on that.

For now this raised curbside parking will be maintained. But eventually it will probably be converted to the same design as everywhere else when the street is rebuilt, if council agrees to it

Near Avenue Rd, they haven't finished installing all the markings and flexi posts, so some drivers don't realize that they are not supposed to park next to the curb.

It doesn't help their confusion that just a few metres west it briefly becomes curbside parking. Enforcement officers were handing out warning slips, and I was told that next week they will start ticketing drivers.

That's much better

From Spadina to Bathurst, the westbound lane has no barriers due to lack of road width, so expect to see plenty of drivers parking here. A possible solution would be to raise the bike lane to the same level as the sidewalk, just like Sherbourne St.

Needless to say, the intersection at Bathurst is not ideal but I don't think there's much that can be done about it without loosing the turn lane.

West of Bathurst, the street widens just enough to allow for flexi posts. In some places they are not fully installed yet.

There are a couple of spots where I feel that the road space could be put to better use. Here they could have fit at least two more parking spots, or maybe some bike racks rather than just white paint.

 

[ShonTron]

Since left turns are banned at most times of the day (until 10PM 7 days a week) at Bathurst and Bloor, it should be a 24-hour prohibition. The back-up in the late evening heading southbound by left-turning cars is unbearable while sitting on a streetcar.

 

[steveintoronto]

Since left turns are banned at most times of the day (until 10PM 7 days a week) at Bathurst and Bloor, it should be a 24-hour prohibition. The back-up in the late evening heading southbound by left-turning cars is unbearable while sitting on a streetcar.

I just cycled the stretch east along the length, and then back to Shaw. There's some major design faults. Salsa's pics will help me explain them. Your "no left turn" point is an excellent one, especially as that pertains to the easterly direction cycle lane being crossed by side traffic. Twice I saw near hits with cars pulling out from side streets into the lane, oblivious of oncoming cyclists, to get a site line clear of the parked cars out from the curb, to make a left turn. A right turn is only less dangerous by degree.

Perhaps this morning's ride was a lot more 'merry' than what's ongoing this time of day? Those narrow cycle lanes? Very dangerous, as another poster has made clear, you can't pass in them, so I and others were stuck behind the slowest riders. So quite a few nit-brain cyclists, instead of waiting for a clear opportunity to pass, would either go up on the sidewalk and along, or into what is now the parking buffer.Not to mention flying through red lights, whatever...

And the parking: If you ever need evidence of the limited abilities of Toronto drivers to park, take a look where the bollards aren't installed yet. With few exceptions, they park haphazardly on the edge of the cycle lane. That should be a *double* solid line to protect cyclists. Better yet, it should be solid, like a curb (temporary ones are better than nothing). My 'alarm perception' cycling along there was very high. Body English of drivers and cyclists alike wasn't good, near impossible to read intentions.

No temp signs erected to instruct/inform drivers! Around University Rd, many were stopping in the parking lanes, and opening passenger doors right onto the bike lane.

Vehicles turning across the bike lanes: Always a problem, many jurisdictions don't get this to conform with the HTA. The solid line must be broken to show where attaining the lane is legal. Standard practice in Ontario is two car lengths *before* the turn. That's not properly done. One girl I was having discussions with on her experience of the lanes as we were cycling had to brake and missed a car that pulled a right turn at Christie by inches. It shook her up, for obvious reasons.

My overall impression of the "experiment"? Better go back to the drawing board, and get this right. Someone is going to get severely injured, very soon. Ironically, Richmond and Adelaide are light years ahead, not the least because of *solid barriers*! The City had best put down temp curbs and/or planters in lieu of proper boulevards. Even where the bollards are extant, drivers are still parked haphazardly.

It is the first official day....perhaps some features will be addressed immediately? Frankly, I'll be avoiding it until such time as some of the serious issues are worked out.

Btw: I didn't see one cop or city employee monitoring the situation the entire length and back.

There are a couple of spots where I feel that the road space could be put to better use. Here they could have fit at least two more parking spots, or maybe some bike racks rather than just white paint.

Sightlines! Take a close look at that intersection. It's already partially blind. For the same reason jurisdictions dictate cutting bushes and hedges at intersections, so must corners be kept clear of parking.

From Spadina to Bathurst, the westbound lane has no barriers due to lack of road width, so expect to see plenty of drivers parking here. A possible solution would be to raise the bike lane to the same level as the sidewalk, just like Sherbourne St.

Take a close look at the pavement markings. This is illegal by the HTA! A deadly accident is prone to happen by a motorist forced to *cross a lane without first attaining it!* By law, a vehicle can only turn from a lane on the inward most side of the road unless marked otherwise. (Multi-lane roads at stoplights)

Whoever laid this out should be fired. And to compound the danger, there's that car illegally stopped, parked straight ahead. I see no one-way sign, so a car could come to that corner from the side-street, enter into the bike lane to gain a sight-line, and completely foul the line of direction of a cyclist moving at speed toward them. There was no shortage of cars stopped like that one when I checked it out an hour ago. My sixth sense tingled the entire length and back. This is very poorly designed, and is going to cost a life or two before someone has the sense to revisit how this is done.

 

[mdrejhon]

I just cycled the stretch east along the length, and then back to Shaw. There's some major design faults. Salsa's pics will help me explain them. Your "no left turn" point is an excellent one, especially as that pertains to the easterly direction cycle lane being crossed by side traffic. Twice I saw near hits with cars pulling out from side streets into the lane, oblivious of oncoming cyclists, to get a site line clear of the parked cars out from the curb, to make a left turn. A right turn is only less dangerous by degree.

Perhaps this morning's ride was a lot more 'merry' than what's ongoing this time of day? Those narrow cycle lanes? Very dangerous, as another poster has made clear, you can't pass in them, so I and others were stuck behind the slowest riders. So quite a few nit-brain cyclists, instead of waiting for a clear opportunity to pass, would either go up on the sidewalk and along, or into what is now the parking buffer.Not to mention flying through red lights, whatever...

And the parking: If you ever need evidence of the limited abilities of Toronto drivers to park, take a look where the bollards aren't installed yet. With few exceptions, they park haphazardly on the edge of the cycle lane. That should be a *double* solid line to protect cyclists. Better yet, it should be solid, like a curb (temporary ones are better than nothing). My 'alarm perception' cycling along there was very high. Body English of drivers and cyclists alike wasn't good, near impossible to read intentions.

No temp signs erected to instruct/inform drivers! Around University Rd, many were stopping in the parking lanes, and opening passenger doors right onto the bike lane.

Vehicles turning across the bike lanes: Always a problem, many jurisdictions don't get this to conform with the HTA. The solid line must be broken to show where attaining the lane is legal. Standard practice in Ontario is two car lengths *before* the turn. That's not properly done. One girl I was having discussions with on her experience of the lanes as we were cycling had to brake and missed a car that pulled a right turn at Christie by inches. It shook her up, for obvious reasons.

My overall impression of the "experiment"? Better go back to the drawing board, and get this right. Someone is going to get severely injured, very soon. Ironically, Richmond and Adelaide are light years ahead, not the least because of *solid barriers*! The City had best put down temp curbs and/or planters in lieu of proper boulevards. Even where the bollards are extant, drivers are still parked haphazardly.

It is the first official day....perhaps some features will be addressed immediately? Frankly, I'll be avoiding it until such time as some of the serious issues are worked out.

Btw: I didn't see one cop or city employee monitoring the situation the entire length and back.



Sightlines! Take a close look at that intersection. It's already partially blind. For the same reason jurisdictions dictate cutting bushes and hedges at intersections, so must corners be kept clear of parking.



Take a close look at the pavement markings. This is illegal by the HTA! A deadly accident is prone to happen by a motorist forced to *cross a lane without first attaining it!* By law, a vehicle can only turn from a lane on the inward most side of the road unless marked otherwise. (Multi-lane roads at stoplights)

Whoever laid this out should be fired. And to compound the danger, there's that car illegally stopped, parked straight ahead. I see no one-way sign, so a car could come to that corner from the side-street, enter into the bike lane to gain a sight-line, and completely foul the line of direction of a cyclist moving at speed toward them. There was no shortage of cars stopped like that one when I checked it out an hour ago. My sixth sense tingled the entire length and back. This is very poorly designed, and is going to cost a life or two before someone has the sense to revisit how this is done.

I like the lanes, but, the sightlines definitely is cause for concern -- agreed on that item

Some good points to highlight -- why not polish up this into a letter sent to Toronto's cycle department including to create markings at intersections ASAP, etc?

 

[steveintoronto]

MD: To be cynically blunt, they won't listen. They have other pressures bearing on them.
I'm still ruminating as to what's so wrong with the the Bloor 'experiment', and been digging to get other reactions. This is telling:
https://nowtoronto.com/news/bloor-bike-lane-warning-/

Meantime, by opening the first page of this string by mistake, I see this poster five years ago hits the nail on the head:

With Richmond, you'd just need a more prominent curb protecting the two lanes. Like this:

I read reasons that they chose not to do it this way...but I have to wonder why? The permanence of this boulevard can be done on a temporary basis with pre-cast concrete curb lengths (like in parking lots) doubled, with crushed limestone, gravel or soil thrown in between. The lane width is still only a single, but opportunity to pass slow movers is available by passing in the opposing lane. The problem of blocked sight-lines at intersections still exists, but the presented psychology of this pic instills confidence. There's a 'predictable order' to this pic, can't fully describe it, it's been achieved on stretches in Toronto, Hoskin immediately comes to mind, so why have they botched Bloor so badly?

I'm sorry to be so opposite to Salsa's enthusiasm, but most of the pics, to me, a very experienced cyclist (my last accident was 20 years ago) have 'danger' lurking in them. There's many roads that do same, one look, and I know I'll do extra miles to avoid them. Ditto Bloor. Unless the irrationality of it is addressed, no-one is speaking the same language, or doing the same dance. It's chaotic, and it's going to come to grief very soon.

When I view those Dutch vids, or look at the pic above, I see very low risks, one can relax while pedalling hard, and make good time. Bloor doesn't do that. The 'experiment' is looking jinxed to me at this point. And yet some other stretches in Toronto are very conducive to speed and safety. Adelaide and Richmond both are miles ahead.

As for the lane to affect a turn from, by definition in the HTA, a cycle lane is a *lane*!

Turning a corner
To turn a corner, signal well before the turn. When the way is clear, move into the proper lane, either the far right lane for a right turn or the far left lane in your direction for a left turn. Signal your turn and look from side to side and check your blind spots to make sure the way is clear.

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/handbook/section2.6.1.shtml

Legal jurisdiction of cycling infrastructure is a *municipal* competence, but it must conform to provincial and federal specs and laws. I went into depth with this in Guelph, where they actually *withdrew* some "cycling boxes" (still extant in Hamilton and other cities) as it conflicted with the wording of the HTA. But one aspect that remains is the breaking of the solid lines into dashed lines *two cars lengths* before a turn at an intersection, so that the cycle lane, "the lane closest to the curb" is attained before turning. This prevents vehicles from swinging *across* the cycle lane, which is a serious offence under the Act. It's a serious offence to turn across any lanes without first attaining them, a flagrant violation you'll see commonly done on highways.

As to how some of that lane marking got past the City's traffic department is a good question...and there's going to be some serious accidents the courts are going to have to sort out. The City is probably liable at least in part, if not whole.

We'll see if the City remedies this in the next while.

More later, I'm still digesting what's not right with this, and to define it.