From what I have read about Forum, in the past they have called landlines only .... perhaps they've upped their game now. If so, good for them.
|
|
|
- Thread starter rp07
- Start date
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
The funny part of the poll was where they surveyed if traffic moved more slowly since the bike lanes were installed. I drive this area multiple times in a week (I live here as well so I see positive and negative aspects to the lanes personally). In my observation traffic moves at about 50% of pre-bike lane times.
During day-time off-peak the traffic moves at a decent level where you could consider the bike lanes as a successful addition to the area. During rush-hour intersections along the entire route see cars trapped or in danger of being trapped in intersections because there is sometimes no movement during an entire signal light now at some intersections. Also, turning vehicles coming from side streets are forced to inch there way into the bike lanes because there are no sight-lines (left turns from side-streets are impossible now), it would be suicidal to merge into traffic without blocking the bike-lane to merge. This is completely dangerous and an utter failure of traffic planning.
In short, off-peak the lanes work well and traffic levels are acceptable. On-peak the lanes substantially increase vehicle congestion and are dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicle traffic
My suggestion: I think that the bike lanes should be moved away from the curb-side. The curb-side configuration is in my opinion more dangerous for cyclists. If the current configuration remains I suggest eliminating all on-street parking to enhance safety.
During day-time off-peak the traffic moves at a decent level where you could consider the bike lanes as a successful addition to the area. During rush-hour intersections along the entire route see cars trapped or in danger of being trapped in intersections because there is sometimes no movement during an entire signal light now at some intersections. Also, turning vehicles coming from side streets are forced to inch there way into the bike lanes because there are no sight-lines (left turns from side-streets are impossible now), it would be suicidal to merge into traffic without blocking the bike-lane to merge. This is completely dangerous and an utter failure of traffic planning.
In short, off-peak the lanes work well and traffic levels are acceptable. On-peak the lanes substantially increase vehicle congestion and are dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicle traffic
My suggestion: I think that the bike lanes should be moved away from the curb-side. The curb-side configuration is in my opinion more dangerous for cyclists. If the current configuration remains I suggest eliminating all on-street parking to enhance safety.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
Sounds like what happened when the "pedestrian scrambles" were installed at Bay & Bloor and Yonge & Bloor, leading to massive traffic jams. The Bay & Bloor scramble has since been removed and the traffic is a lot better there. There are no bike lanes east of Avenue Road and west of Sherbourne although there are "sharrows". I don't think the bike lane traffic jams on Bloor are as bad as the pedestrian scramble traffic jams a few years ago.
Queen's Quay is far worse than Bloor though. The traffic is always horrible there since they narrowed it.
People are not going to put up with bike lane traffic jams. If the Yonge Street bike lane gets built in North York Centre, expect severe traffic jams as it is already bad and since there are GO buses there it will leave GO bus service there essentially unusable and force GO to move all its buses to York Mills terminal. The same is true with Woodbine (though Yonge St north is far worse). If these bike lanes lead to severe traffic congestion, expect them to be removed in a few years.
LNahid2000
Senior Member
Andrew, why do you think getting single occupant vehicle traffic moving is so important?
andrewpmk
Senior Member
Because the majority of people in Toronto use cars to get around, a significant minority use TTC to get around, and a tiny minority use bikes to get around. The number of bikes on Woodbine right now is about 6-8 an hour. Narrowing a road to put in bike lanes will get both car drivers and TTC bus users (which are the vast majority) stuck in traffic. Also bike lanes have a dubious safety record. We have seen this with the Laurier Avenue bike death in Ottawa, or the fact that College St in Toronto and De Maisonneuve in Montreal have some of the highest bike accident rates in their respective cities.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Not the majority of the areas in question - and if that's how it works, we should be expanding the sidewalks and shutting down the roads in certain parts of the city. Like most of downtown, actually.
AoD
AoD
LNahid2000
Senior Member
Andrew, why are you assuming the number of bikes on the road will remain the same as when there is no bike infrastructure? Also, could you please provide some statistics for your claims about bike lanes?
andrewpmk
Senior Member
All the bike lanes in the GTA outside the downtown core and the immediate area around it are severely underused. You don't exactly see many bikes on the few bike lanes that exist in places like Royal York Road, Highway 7 or Kingston Road in Durham.
Also read the following report about bike and pedestrian accidents in Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/hl/bgrd/backgroundfile-81601.pdf
Also see the following map of bike accidents in Montreal: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/bike-accidents/index.html
LNahid2000
Senior Member
Andrew, those links don't say anything about accident rates compared to roads where there are no bike lanes. Also, we're not talking about areas like Highway 7 or Kingston Road here.
ADRM
Senior Member
Andrew, care to enlighten us as to your grand alternative plan to deal with a significantly and steadily growing population in the face of the fact that the available space downtown is not - and will never be - growing? Hmm?
Actually, I'll jump in: Nothing you say will be coherent or convincing because there's no good answer that revolves around perpetuating a physical infrastructure ecosystem that promotes single occupancy vehicle usage amid predictable demographic trends and the reality of non-magically-expanding physical space.
You're stuck in the past and advocating that our city remain there with you and that's why those of us who care about the future of this city and the people who live in it are perpetually pissed off at you.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
Build a larger subway system. Taking the subway is a lot safer than riding a bicycle in Toronto.
LNahid2000
Senior Member
Andrew, taking the subway is also a lot safer than driving a car. Should we just get rid of all roads then?
If we built proper cycling infrastructure, like in Europe, it would cost a lot less than a subway and it would be safer than what we have now. Plus it has the added benefit of getting people exercise so it contributes positively to our health care costs.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
I don't dispute that bike lanes are a lot cheaper than a subway, but you get what you pay for. Toronto needs a larger subway system and better GO train and bus service. Bicycling is not a very safe method of transportation, it is impractical in the winter and bike lanes often take away road space from cars/buses and make traffic worse.
As for exercise you should be encouraging people to walk because bicycling is far more dangerous than walking (this is pretty obvious from the Toronto Public Health statistics given that the number of pedestrians in Toronto is far larger than the number of bicyclists).
I didn't say bike lanes, I said proper infrastructure -- separated, dedicated infrastructure such as that seen in Europe where biking is very safe and is very prevalent.
Also, safety isn't determined simply on the number of people engaging in the activity. But yes, encourage walking too. Anything to get people out of sedentary car travel.
Also, safety isn't determined simply on the number of people engaging in the activity. But yes, encourage walking too. Anything to get people out of sedentary car travel.