News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

PinkLucy said:
Look at all those well-trained pedestrians NOT walking on the cycle path. And yes he's fast, but he does obey the lights, unlike bike share guy who ran the red.
Click to expand...
Thank you Lucy! You've just allowed me to quantify one of my impressions on why I use the term "frantic".

Have any of you readers heard the theory of why 30 mph as the speed limit came into existence? I'll see if I can Google reference later, it's hearsay, but makes incredible sense:

(lol...and I'm not this old!) When motorized vehicles first become popular, there were no speed limits. Very few vehicles could reach 30 mph anyway, but once they did, suddenly the accident rate became a real problem.

Jump forward:

Ever wonder why Joe Farmer, many older ones still to this day, idle along at 30 mph on back roads? (In fact, research has shown 28 mph, but I digress). Theory has it that it's the speed beyond which the ability of the human psyche to react to the unforeseen is maxed out. At 30 mph, you can manage almost all road emergencies in due time.

One must exist for cycling...a speed at which...*within reason* you can handle almost all emergencies, like stopping in time without skidding, or if your brakes lock, losing control of the machine.

When I see vids like that (and there's no shortage of them up at Youtube) I think: "Whoa, slow down $&^$%*(". And then I think "damn, maybe it's just me" until reading the comments of others saying the same thing. I think other cyclists are just as much a danger to me on the cycle paths as drivers are on the roads. Stats won't support that contention...but my level of anxiety does. (sixth sense). Many go far too fast to react to sudden occurrences. I've told many to &(&*$$*(_ from their incessant ringing of their bells behind me. I leave it at that, point made. Many cyclists are not in control...and those are the ones who are most likely going to sink the Bloor St experiment.
 
The city's 10-year cycling plan has been released ahead of next week's public works meeting.

Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-92811.pdf


Appendix 1 - 4: Maps of proposed network



Appendix 5 - 11: See attached document which has five funding scenarios (ranging from $8m to $25m per year) and the corresponding scope of the network. City staff are recommending scenario 3 ($16m per year). Similar scope as the $25m, but longer implementation schedule.

Appendix 12: Proposed crossings over major barriers (i.e highways, railways, ravines): http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-92819.pdf
 

Attachments

  • Funding Scenarios.pdf
    1.4 MB · Views: 427
salsa said:
The city's 10-year cycling plan has been released ahead of next week's public works meeting.

Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-92811.pdf
Click to expand...

There is much to commend in this plan, though to me, some fairly odd omissions.

I'm unclear on the rationale for omitting Broadview north of Danforth, which has been in previous bike plan iterations.

My feeling is that a lot of cycling traffic coming off Millwood/Leaside bridge is bound for downtown, and Donlands, while and important connection, is the wrong direction.

***

I also wonder my more Steeles in the west end isn't contemplated (particularly around York U. The ROW is plenty wide, and serving the University community as robustly as possible would seem sensible.

There are a few other questions marks for me.

Curiously, they've omitted all the of preliminarily proposed Scarborough Waterfront Trail enhancements (though in fairness, what actually be funded/approved is not yet known).

The Warden Hydro Corridor is potentially a very good offering. Though I have reservations about a Very long tunnel under the 401, in terms of its isolation. My instinct would be to
nix that in favour of bike lanes on Warden across the 401; and/or building a bridge at the Pharmacy Avenue alignment (either cycling/pedestrian only, or add one-lane each way for cars/buses).
 
Northern Light said:
Curiously, they've omitted all the of preliminarily proposed Scarborough Waterfront Trail enhancements (though in fairness, what actually be funded/approved is not yet known).
Click to expand...

I should have posted Appendix 13 which is titled "studies led by others". It includes the Scarborough Waterfront.

backgroundfile-92840.jpg
 

Attachments

  • backgroundfile-92840.jpg
    backgroundfile-92840.jpg
    2.9 MB · Views: 516
Northern Light said:
The Warden Hydro Corridor is potentially a very good offering. Though I have reservations about a Very long tunnel under the 401, in terms of its isolation. My instinct would be to nix that in favour of bike lanes on Warden across the 401; and/or building a bridge at the Pharmacy Avenue alignment (either cycling/pedestrian only, or add one-lane each way for cars/buses).
Click to expand...

I have long thought of having bicycle infrastructure along Warden north of the 401. The ROW is fairly wide with wide boulevards on each side of the roadway. I'm curious to know how the trails would be implemented. A single, wider bi-directional trail would probably result in the removal of a lot of trees on one side; two one-directional tracks adjacent to the curb on each side could reduce the number of trees cut down significantly.

Crossing the 401 is the biggest hurdle for cyclists. The ideal crossings are those without interchanges (east of Yonge: Don Mills, Birchmount, Midland, Progress, Conlins), plus the East Don Trail. I usually use Vic. Park or the East Don Trail depending on my destination. Vic. Park can be scary with a lot of traffic between the 401 and the Consumers Road Business Park and the bridge construction that has been going on the last few years. Warden would be a better option for cycling route, but I don't think the overpass is wide enough to accommodate dedicated lanes/cycle tracks.

I like the location of the proposed crossing as it leads directly to/from the hydro corridor south of the 401. I agree a bridge is preferred give the length of the crossing and perceived safety issues with a long tunnel. Making use of the hydro corridor south of the 401 is great too. I wish the City had the foresight/guts in the late 1990's to incorporate a cycling route through the new subdivisions that were built when the hydro corridor between the 401 and Finch Hydro corridor was decommissioned and sold off. I will use the new local streets as much as possible. A few links to/from some of the new cul-de-sacs are missing unfortunately, primarily around around Finch and Sheppard.

There is still a 10-metre wide Enbridge ROW from Steeles to the 401. Enbridge replaced the pipes last summer, and during construction consultations I inquired about putting in a multi-use trail above it since they were tearing up the land anyways. The Enbridge reps were not opposed to it, but had mentioned the need for the City to lease the land for public use and obtain the necessary easements. They also mentioned when previous consultations were done a few years earlier (I was living in BC at the time), residents abutting the ROW and their Councillor, Norm Kelly, opposed the idea of a multi-use trail and people going through their neighbourhood.
 
Northern Light said:
[...]I'm unclear on the rationale for omitting Broadview north of Danforth, which has been in previous bike plan iterations.

My feeling is that a lot of cycling traffic coming off Millwood/Leaside bridge is bound for downtown, and Donlands, while and important connection, is the wrong direction.
Click to expand...

Well noted. Nobody headed SW-ish from the north (i.e. towards downtown) would head east on Donlands.
 
marcus_a_j said:
There is still a 10-metre wide Enbridge ROW from Steeles to the 401. Enbridge replaced the pipes last summer, and during construction consultations I inquired about putting in a multi-use trail above it since they were tearing up the land anyways. The Enbridge reps were not opposed to it, but had mentioned the need for the City to lease the land for public use and obtain the necessary easements. They also mentioned when previous consultations were done a few years earlier (I was living in BC at the time), residents abutting the ROW and their Councillor, Norm Kelly, opposed the idea of a multi-use trail and people going through their neighbourhood.
Click to expand...

Pharmacy wouldn't be a bad cycling route either. It's underused as a motor traffic route, so there's plenty of room, but needs a connection across the 401.

Also, Norm Kelly is awful.
 
ShonTron said:
Pharmacy wouldn't be a bad cycling route either. It's underused as a motor traffic route, so there's plenty of room, but needs a connection across the 401.

Also, Norm Kelly is awful.
Click to expand...

"residents abutting the ROW and their Councillor, Norm Kelly, opposed the idea of a multi-use trail and people going through their neighbourhood."

Do we vote our councillors to represent our interests or? I see someone doing their job.
 
Filip said:
"residents abutting the ROW and their Councillor, Norm Kelly, opposed the idea of a multi-use trail and people going through their neighbourhood."

Do we vote our councillors to represent our interests or? I see someone doing their job.
Click to expand...

No. He's representing a few NIMBY constituents who oppose a public trail. How many more of his constituents would benefit from better active transportation and recreation corridors?

I'd say this is a Scarborough councillor doing his job.
 
I doubt many in that part of Scarborough. Similarly, a downtown councillor (and his constituents) would be against expanding roads while the suburban ones would be the opposite. That's why we have wards, and councillors.
 
steveintoronto said:
I'm going to have to watch that vid again to make sure my comments are apt, but my immediate impression is *lack of protocol*! You wouldn't drive like that, why cycle that way? In all fairness to London, I see the same erratic behaviour here in Toronto.

If anyone has vids of Holland/Denmark/Nordic or other regions, please post them. Again, I *live* on my machine, it keeps me alive, but I'd love to know if my impression of *societal factors* has skewed my outlook? I'm led to believe in Oz, it's even wilder. Is it an Anglo shortcoming?
Click to expand...

The problems in the UK and here in Toronto probably come down in part to training. We have courses here like CAN-BIKE, but they're voluntary and the UK has, IIRC, something called the cycling proficiency course, again voluntary and offered through schools. Nothing like the big-picture 'road user' training that kids get in the Netherlands. London itself is crowded and has no shortage of short-tempered people.

This guy in Groningen (considered by some to be an ideal city for cyclists even by NL standards) tends to focus on conflicts more than overall cycling conditions, but it's interesting to see how things get resolved: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCESqTAQAHeIaZAhK9nmhNjQ

The UK and Australia both seem to have a car-first mentality that obsesses on the responsibilities that cyclists supposedly evade (insurance, registration, mythical 'road tax') and their lawlessness, even though a lot of cyclist behaviour is influenced by the environment (both infrastructure and other road users) being hostile to cycling.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top