[the lemur]

As a cyclist, you should be stopping for people getting on/off the streetcar when the doors are open. So this really shouldn't be an issue.

How the Roncesvalles platforms are supposed to work is that bikes stop when streetcar patrons are getting on and off, i.e., when the streetcar is stopped. However, some cyclists don't stop and some TTC patrons step out into the bike lane to see if a streetcar is coming while bikes are still coming towards them. Ideally the bike track should have gone behind the shelter, next to the sidewalk, but I guess there wasn't room.

 

[steveintoronto]

Ideally the bike track should have gone behind the shelter, next to the sidewalk, but I guess there wasn't room.

Agreed on your comments as per some (many) cyclists not stopping, and patrons mindlessly obstructing traffic, but on balance of consideration, disagree with the quote above. It would cause even more confusion with inept patrons and regular pedestrian traffic alike.

The present arrangement is very much a compromise, and at first I was not impressed, until slowly realizing it is better, far better, than the alternatives. What I realized last night cycling down lower Sherbourne (Queen to King) is how much of the curb is ramped, which rather defeats the separation of the bike path from motorized vehicle traffic. Perhaps it's meant for delivery vehicles? Except in many cases, there's no corresponding loading dock or entrance.

Anyone have the story on that?

 

[Napoleon]

Agreed on your comments as per some (many) cyclists not stopping, and patrons mindlessly obstructing traffic, but on balance of consideration, disagree with the quote above. It would cause even more confusion with inept patrons and regular pedestrian traffic alike.

The present arrangement is very much a compromise, and at first I was not impressed, until slowly realizing it is better, far better, than the alternatives. What I realized last night cycling down lower Sherbourne (Queen to King) is how much of the curb is ramped, which rather defeats the separation of the bike path from motorized vehicle traffic. Perhaps it's meant for delivery vehicles? Except in many cases, there's no corresponding loading dock or entrance.

Anyone have the story on that?

Sherbourne is kind of the worst "hard separation" (I mean non flex-post) design possible. It really encourages pretty much any vehicle (cars, delivery trucks, etc) to just ease over onto it and stop/park. The best in the city right now IMO is on Wellesley, where the separating curb is squared off. I haven't seen much driving over that.

Roncesvalles could work well with a little bit more education/signage at the streetcar stops.

 

[steveintoronto]

Sherbourne is kind of the worst "hard separation" (I mean non flex-post) design possible. It really encourages pretty much any vehicle (cars, delivery trucks, etc) to just ease over onto it and stop/park. The best in the city right now IMO is on Wellesley, where the separating curb is squared off. I haven't seen much driving over that.

Roncesvalles could work well with a little bit more education/signage at the streetcar stops.

Agreed on every point. I'm back in Toronto after being away for five years, and some of the new cycling infrastructure is impressive, but some more than others. I got a good taste of the Wellesley route on the weekend, and it offers good separation and obviously a right of way that's made clear to motorists and pedestrians alike, not the least the routing behind parked cars in spots. Would have been great if space had permitted that on Ronces, but the space just isn't there. Agreed on better signage for Ronces, albeit it seems to be getting better just in the six months I've been living close to there. There's reason for optimism, albeit I see far too many cyclists flying down parts of Ronces where the bike-lane isn't established far too close to parked cars and the ever-threatening risk of being doored with a streetcar beside you. Nothing can prevent idiocy.

 

[the lemur]

Agreed on your comments as per some (many) cyclists not stopping, and patrons mindlessly obstructing traffic, but on balance of consideration, disagree with the quote above. It would cause even more confusion with inept patrons and regular pedestrian traffic alike.

The present arrangement is very much a compromise, and at first I was not impressed, until slowly realizing it is better, far better, than the alternatives. What I realized last night cycling down lower Sherbourne (Queen to King) is how much of the curb is ramped, which rather defeats the separation of the bike path from motorized vehicle traffic. Perhaps it's meant for delivery vehicles? Except in many cases, there's no corresponding loading dock or entrance.

Anyone have the story on that?

I don't see how Roncesvalles having the bike track go behind the streetcar stop would be a problem. Once TTC riders cross the bike track from the sidewalk to the streetcar platform/island, there's no more conflict between bikes and peds.

The lower part of the Sherbourne track was the last to be built; I'm not sure why it's ramped but it seems to be blocked less often than rest of the track.

 

[steveintoronto]

I don't see how Roncesvalles having the bike track go behind the streetcar stop would be a problem. Once TTC riders cross the bike track from the sidewalk to the streetcar platform/island, there's no more conflict between bikes and peds.

Next time you're on Ronces (I live right at the top of it) take a close look, there just isn't the space to do what you suggest. How are you going to have shelters, sidewalk, a bike path, a lane of traffic, all X 2 on there? The sidewalk is very narrow as it is. The line-up for the Revue or any other venue blocks what sidewalk there is.

The present arrangement is a compromise, and one that works, albeit people have to *make it work*. And that's exactly the point that Aldebaran makes. Wellesley is a wide street with space for bike lanes behind parking, not all streets have that kind of clearance, and certainly not Roncesvalles.

 

[P23]

Parking on one side of Roncesvalles could easily be removed to accommodate a proper bike lane, but I doubt that's an option that would be very popular.

 

[Fred.S]

I was also skeptical about Roncy when they redesigned it, but have come to realize it's probably the best design given its width. I would've loved a separated bike lane, but cars generally drive pretty slow on it. Really everyone moves along at about the same speed, and it's easy for people to cross at any point. It almost has a woonerf feel to it.

The only thing I hope they change is moving the yellow tactile strip at the streetcar stops onto the sidewalk, instead of on the bike lane, like on Sherbourne. I think that might be in the plans when they modify the bumpouts next year. Most pedestrians are good now, but some still like to stand on the bike lane.

 

[P23]

I was also skeptical about Roncy when they redesigned it, but have come to realize it's probably the best design given its width. I would've loved a separated bike lane, but cars generally drive pretty slow on it. Really everyone moves along at about the same speed, and it's easy for people to cross at any point. It almost has a woonerf feel to it.

The only thing I hope they change is moving the yellow tactile strip at the streetcar stops onto the sidewalk, instead of on the bike lane, like on Sherbourne. I think that might be in the plans when they modify the bumpouts next year. Most pedestrians are good now, but some still like to stand on the bike lane.

The main problem I see with the lane is that you are unpredictable to drivers since the lane isn't continuous, so cyclists pop in and out of traffic every block. You are also in the door zone of the many parked cars. If I can heap yet more criticism on it, the intersections at each end of the street are not bike (or pedestrian) friendly at all.

 

[muller877]

I do a lot of the same kind of riding (when I can), but you're a lot farther east, so the Warden Woods/Crescent Town/Taylor Creek part of what you described is the only part I'm familiar with. (One day I'll get out to the east end and ride the waterfront to the Rouge and beyond ...).

One of my longest routes has been, starting from around St Clair & Dovercourt, up to Belt Line, east to around Davisville, Colin/Edith to Chatsworth Ravine, across to Sunnybrook, Barber Greene/Greenbelt to Moccasin Park, Victoria Village/Wexford to Kennedy Station, southwest to Warden Woods, zigzag down to Balmy Beach, MGT to the end of the Don Trail, turnaround at Pottery/Brick Works, Milkman's Lane, Sherbourne, Front/Wellington, Dan Leckie, MGT to Roncesvalles, across High Park, down Windermere, up the Humber to just north of St Clair, down the Railpath.

I also like trying to follow the parts of the Belt Line that didn't get turned into a trail (around South Kingsway) but it's very approximate.

Talking about the Humber I always wondered why the city has not turned the west side of South Kingsway into bike paths (removing the west side parking). These spaces are hardly filled and all the cars could easily fit into the east side parking areas.

Would create a good N-S route to Bloor (the south Humber trail has to go around the wastewater plant which makes it a bit of a pain). And only 2 intersections on the west side from Bloor to trail entrance.

An opportune time since the road is ripped up and will have to be repaved in the fall or next spring.

 

[Fred.S]

The main problem I see with the lane is that you are unpredictable to drivers since the lane isn't continuous, so cyclists pop in and out of traffic every block. You are also in the door zone of the many parked cars. If I can heap yet more criticism on it, the intersections at each end of the street are not bike (or pedestrian) friendly at all.

That's true, and of course in my ideal world there would be no parking, extended sidewalks, and cycle tracks. But that popping in and out of cyclists, the pedestrians everywhere, and slow cars and streetcars, that bit of unpredictability, I find keeps everyone more alert, slow, and is exactly why I compared it to a woonerf/shared street. As a driver, cyclist, pedestrian, and 504 user, I absolutely love Roncesvalles.

 

[steveintoronto]

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/edi...ing-in-bike-lanes-long-overdue-editorial.html

 

[steveintoronto]

Parking on one side of Roncesvalles could easily be removed to accommodate a proper bike lane, but I doubt that's an option that would be very popular.

And the streetcar tracks? Without moving those, what have you gained? Unless you intend two-way cycle lanes one side of the street. It's too late. There are very real problems, doubtless, liability to getting doored is the worst of them, but given the situation, it's better than what it was before the 'transformation'.

The only thing I hope they change is moving the yellow tactile strip at the streetcar stops onto the sidewalk, instead of on the bike lane, like on Sherbourne.

That's an excellent point. the 'tactile strips' are coming loose in a few places, dangerous in themselves, and that's one thing that certainly should be revisited. I think posting signs warning of the fines liable to dooring can't hurt either. I'm a cynic, as well as an optimist, but nothing gets through to some people as the thought of their pocket-book having a hemorrhage.

On the other hand, I see far too many cyclists flying past cars, any one of which could open their doors at any moment. One of the golden rules of safe cycling is to 'always be defensive'. Too bad most cyclists haven't a clue.

 

[steveintoronto]

I also like trying to follow the parts of the Belt Line that didn't get turned into a trail (around South Kingsway) but it's very approximate.

There's only the slightest trace in a few spots for the *West Belt Line* (distinct from the main one). Traces are much easier to see at the north end and behind houses on Humbercrest. Thanks for the response on my 'Route to the Far East'. It's unfortunate that the Bluff path only goes so far west, and then you're pretty much left in limbo. Kingston Rd is a nasty piece of poo-poo, albeit I used to fly down it on long distance trips back into the city. I still do the distance, but I take quality over quantity nowadays. Rail Trails are *really* the thing, even if you use them to get to back roads.

They have no requirement to carry ID or anything identifying them when interacting with the police or facing fines.

You're wrong! Careful you don't choke on your smugness getting caught in your accelerator:

HTA 218 - Identification
Cyclists must stop and identify themselves when required to stop by
police for breaking traffic laws. The police officer will ask you for your
correct name and address.

Any more lectures on the Law? I suggest you learn the Law before making any more of a fool of yourself.

 

[steveintoronto]

Expansion from 800 bikes to 1800 bikes is happening this summer, so maybe they will reach your area.

Good news! I've never used one, probably fall off the way most are set-up, (I'm spoiled by my thirty+ year old Brooks Swallow cranked way up) but anything to promote the cause is good.

Btw: I was on the Island today, (it's been almost a decade) and noticed that they're renting tandems...a *huge* step for man, two steps for men/women kind, as those quadcycles are an affront to...well...almost everything rational. I notice the aberrations are now banned from the boardwalk. I call that "progress"! lol....Platform shoes and bell-bottoms, or quadcycles. Which is the worst nightmare to find yourself in?