This post by Jackson Smylie is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Jackson is currently in his third year at U of T, completing his B.A. in mathematics and philosophy. An avid cyclist, he loves the challenge of downtown biking and excitedly awaits the introduction of more bike lanes. He believes that cycling has the power to effect great social, environmental, and therapeutic change. Jackson’s experience in environmental philosophy helps him understand the power of individual behavioural change within a large group.

Most cyclists say farewell to their bikes in the sub-zero Toronto winters. But although biking in cold, snowy conditions poses some problems for cyclists, they are all surmountable with adequate preparation and conscious decision making on the road! With these 5 tips, you can safely and confidently bike throughout the winter. Winter doesn’t have to stop you from saving money on transit, keeping in shape, and enjoying the outdoors!

​Even though cycling is an aerobic exercise – and you may even break a sweat in the cold months – you should err on the side of warmth for your winter commutes. This means many layers of clothing and extra consideration for extremities. A sure-fire recipe for a warm ride is a pair of winter boots, double-layered clothing, mittens, a winter coat, and a balaclava.

The Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute advises against wearing a hat underneath your helmet, but your ears can stay nice and toasty with ear muffs or head bands that don’t compromise the helmet’s safety.

Most importantly, remember to account for the wind chill that comes with biking – cycling at 15km/h in still air is the same as a 15km/h wind. The colder it is, the greater the wind chill factor will be! Although wind chill will not cool your body past the actual outside temperature, it will cool your body down at a faster rate than if you are staying still. Windproof clothing is a must!

​There is a seemingly endless list of supplies to buy for winter biking, but some are more essential than others. Most important is to equip your bike with extra lights, as there is typically less daylight in the winter. In addition to lights on the front and back of your bike, you could buy a clip-on light for your helmet, or even buy extra reflectors for your wheels or pedals.

Fenders are very important for a dry ride! Roads in the winter are often slushy, and fenders prevent your tires from kicking that slush up to your back and head!

Although it’s not necessary to get new tires for the winter, tubeless tires, solid tires, or carbide-studded tires help with grip and prevent flat tires. Slushy winter roads demand more from your tires than in the summer, so you could keep a durable set of tires to swap out during the cold!

​Every cyclist makes split-second decisions on the road, but decisions that are safe in the summer may be unwise in the colder months. You must adjust your cycling heuristics to account for black ice and slippery roads. Cycle more slowly than usual and brake well in advance of traffic lights in case you hit an icy patch. As much as it’s fun to slide down a hill on skis, sliding through a busy intersection is an adventure you should best avoid.

Cars may not expect to see cyclists in the winter, and they may not be prepared to give you lots of space on the road. To avoid collisions, you can ride a couple feet away from the curb so vehicles can see you, wear extra lights, and cycle far out from parked cars to prevent getting doored. After a snowfall, smaller roads are often not plowed, so you can plan your route ahead of time to make sure you don’t find yourself in pedal-deep snow!

Most importantly, be mentally prepared to deal with slightly worse conditions in the winter than in the summer. Take your time, focus and ride defensively.

If you feel uncomfortable biking in snowy or slushy weather, you don’t have to do it! It is important to not be overcome with fear while on the road, both for your sanity and for your safety. If winter cycling has posed a big challenge for you, start with small steps, such as biking around the block to practice adapting to the new road conditions.

There are many steps you can take to make your winter ride more comfortable. Biking near bus routes ensures you have other transportation options. Try biking with friends at first to keep each other accountable; preparation leads to confidence!

​In addition to buying gear for the winter, it is a good idea to take extra care of your bike. Putting in a few extra minutes after your ride may save you much more time and money down the road. To prevent any deterioration, salt stains should be washed off using a sponge with warm water – using a hose may blast the grease off your bike’s chain and eventually rust its bearings.

Check your tire pressure often; higher air temperature means more air pressure. This means that colder days may require extra tire-pumping. As the days warm up again, you should let some air out of the tires to make sure the pressure does not exceed their limit. Some cyclists advise a slightly lower tire pressure in the winter to increase your grip on slippery roads.

Winter does not need to stop your pedals from turning! With adequate preparation, warm clothing, and prudent decision-making on the road, you can enjoy the frosty air all year long.

This post by Michelle Kearns is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Michelle is a graduate of U of T’s Master of Science in Planning program working in partnership with the Scarborough Cycles project at the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation. Scarborough Cycles is funded by the Metcalf Foundation’s Cycle City program, which aims to build a constituency and culture in support of cycling for transportation.

Scarborough was built for automobiles, this is true. Arterial roads are wide and fast, crossing distances at intersections are long, and winding residential streets are designed to keep traffic out (and at the same time this design restricts the use of these streets as safe cycling shortcuts). However, not everyone drives. TTC ridership counts point to heavily used routes such as Eglinton East (28,000 people on an average weekday), Lawrence East (33,700), and Victoria Park (24,800) (TTC, 2014), and since there is no comprehensive and detailed current walking or cycling data, TTC ridership is the closest we have to understanding how many residents are getting around without a private automobile. We know that car ownership in Scarborough is not nearly as common as what some may assume. There are significant numbers of residents getting around without cars in Scarborough. Even transit riders turn into pedestrians or cyclists when making the trip to or from the bus stop.

Over one month in late 2016, my colleague Trudy Ledsham and I held four focus groups in Southwest Scarborough with the goal of better understanding barriers to walking and cycling for transportation in the area. These focus groups were born out of a survey done by the Scarborough Cycles team when they had initially sought to generally understand travel in Scarborough. Thankfully for us, we were able to take advantage of one question on that survey: “Would you be interested in participating in a focus group on bicycling for transportation?” A total of 32 participants were still interested, months later, and chose to join us for a conversation.

We had expected the discussion to focus broadly on a lack of bike lanes and the challenges of crossing arterial roads, but instead we were privileged to learn about the participants’ daily lives and the unique mobility barriers they experience.

The focus groups included residents from various income groups, ages, and immigration status. Both high-rise dwellers and single-family homeowners participated. Many attendees were eager to tell their stories–of suffering a severe fall off a bike due to feeling forced to ride on the grassy boulevard and not the sidewalk or road, of poor lighting on sidewalks necessitating long route alterations on the way home, or of being passed too closely by fast-moving buses on Pharmacy Avenue while on a bike and fearing for their safety. Many saw TTC fare (and infrequent schedules) as barriers to go grocery shopping, taking their children to daycare, or running errands. Biking was helpful for some trips, but not feasible for many due to distance or the lack of a safe route. Biking to the nearest subway station (Victoria Park for most participants) would reduce commute time, but again, would require time spent on arterial roads—most participants in this case used the sidewalk. The bike parking station at Victoria Park was inaccessible to most—too expensive and too difficult to register as it must be done in-person at Union Station.

There was a sense of confusion for participants who were relatively new to the area when the Ford-era bike lane removal was brought up. For those who try to meander to the grocery store on their bikes, a bike lane on Pharmacy Avenue would have removed a significant barrier.

One of Scarborough’s best resources is the ravine trail system, but many participants felt unsafe exploring the isolated ravines on their own (as they thought there was little in the way of maps or wayfinding) or felt like they could not use these trails to commute as there was no lighting at night. Simply crossing the road was a barrier. Although all arterials are equipped with sidewalks and traffic lights at main intersections, the sheer distance that a pedestrian has to cross while cars attempt to turn across their path was a source of discomfort, especially for participants who were older, faced mobility challenges, or cared for small children.

​This is a summary of the feedback and knowledge gained through this exercise. Thirty-two participants agreed to chat about their daily mobility challenges–many were passionate and truly believed some small changes could enhance safety and security for themselves and their neighbours. However, the system of “being heard” in Toronto is complicated. Councillors, community council, transportation services, the TTC–being new to Canada, having unpredictable schedules, dealing with a language barrier, or having a mobility barrier restricting access to some community consultations hindered many of these residents from accessing the traditional channels of advocating. Southwest Scarborough is a place of great diversity and rich culture, and it is a waste to not extend targeted effort at including these populations in discussing neighbourhood improvements. The narrative of Scarborough as an auto-dominated place where active transportation efforts would be wasted is difficult to overcome. Safety is a right for all–not just those who can navigate the complicated waters of power and representation in this City. It’s time that all modes of mobility are legitimized in Scarborough.

This post by Ryan Anders Whitney is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Ryan is an urban sustainability planner and current PhD student in the Department of Geography and Planning at the University of Toronto. This post is part of a larger research project lead by Dr. Paul Hess that has been funded through the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

​Cities around the world have been increasingly investing in bicycle and other ‘sustainability’ infrastructure in an effort to move growing populations within fixed roadway space. Across Europe, North America, Australia, and South America, many cities are building bike lanes, inaugurating bike share systems, creating open streets / ciclovía programs, and pedestrianizing streets in an attempt to plan more ‘livable’ cities and mitigate the negative consequences associated with automobile development (e.g., air pollution, obesity, traffic deaths, traffic congestion, etc.). In Latin America, Mexico City has emerged as a regional leader based on its’ rapid implementation of such infrastructure.

Mexico City’s investments take place in the context of some of the most extreme consequences of automobile-based development found anywhere in the world. In the 1990s the United Nations infamously named the city as having the world’s worst air pollution, in part due to automobile exhaust that becomes trapped by the mountains that surround the city. While the city has made some coordinated and effective strides to improve air quality since then, pollution levels are creeping back up again to dangerous levels. Indeed, Mexico City’s traffic congestion remains legendary, being named in 2017 as the world’s most congested city.

Furthermore the city, and indeed country, are infamous in planning circles for high levels of traffic deaths. In 2015 412 pedestrians were killed in traffic incidents in Mexico City, a number that is common annually. This number would be approximately equivalent to a death rate of about 140 pedestrians per year in a city of Toronto’s size, or approximately 3.5 times Toronto’s 2016 rate (43 pedestrians were killed in 2016 making it the most deadly year for pedestrian deaths in the city in over a decade). Such an enormous death toll in Mexico City is despite the fact that over 50 percent of households do not have access to a motorized vehicle. However, in an urban region of well over 20 million people, the number of drivers adds up quickly.

In an attempt to relieve some of the aforementioned issues, Mexico City has deliberately moved from a city where it was nearly inconceivable to ride a bike to one that now leads bicycle planning in Latin America and beyond. For example, the city now has one of the largest bike sharing system in the Americas, approximately 200 kilometers of bike lanes, and one of the world’s largest ciclovía programs, muévete en bici (move by bike), where 55 kilometers of streets are closed to traffic and open to pedestrians and cyclists every Sunday. These initiatives have been very successful. For example, Ecobici, the city’s bike sharing system, is one of the most successful in the world in terms of a number of indicators including the number of trips per bike versus the number of residents; it is estimated that number of cyclists in the city between 2008 and 2016, although still a very small percentage of overall mode share, increased nearly six times; the Sunday ciclovía attracts approximately 35,000 people each week with a record of 75,000 having been recorded. The city is also home to a number of new municipal government policies and departments – including, but not limited to, Laboratorio para la Ciudad (Laboratory for the City) and the Autoridad del Espacio Público (Public Space Authority) – that are at the cutting edge of urban sustainability planning within Latin America, and indeed globally. All of this change has happened quickly in planning terms, in less than ten years.

​Many other sustainability initiatives, such as public space ‘revitalization’ and the pedestrianization of streets, have also been remarkably successful in Mexico City. For example, the city pedestrianized Madero Street in 2010, linking the country’s most famous public square (the Zócalo) to its most iconic theatre (Bellas Artes). The street might now be the busiest pedestrian street in all of the Americas attracting an estimated 200,000 pedestrians per hour. This street also exhibits some of the highest land values in the city, up 400 percent per square meter, and has attracted a number of international chain retailers, often being cited by local authorities as an example of commercial success.

​When examined more closely, however, the aforementioned sustainability investments fit comfortably within a larger trend where Mexico City is establishing itself as a global ‘it’ city, attracting unprecedented international attention. For example, in 2016 The New York Times named Mexico City as the world’s number one travel destination; a popular lifestyle blog, Amuse, discusses Mexico City’s reputation as “the new Berlin” specifically referring to how it has emerged over approximately the last ten years as a global creative epicentre attracting international designers, writers, and artists; recently Dazed stated that “Mexico City today has the freedom of downtown 80s” New York City.

The recent uptick of international attention is for a variety of reasons, such a the city’s unique culture, foodscape, art scene, decreased levels of violence when compared with other areas of the country, and a low cost of living (at least from the perspective of those who live in large cities in the Global North). However, sustainability planning is also a tactic that is now being used to sell Mexico City as a ‘green’ and ‘livable’ city. For example, another 2016 travel article from The New York Times discusses the newfound attractiveness of the city partially due to its “extravagant plans for new pedestrian areas”; Forbes gushes that Mexico City is now “safer, cleaner and more liveable than it used to be”; The Guardian explains how the city has been ‘cleaned up’ through neighbourhood revitalization and pedestrianization schemes.

Unprecedented global attention is rightfully attracting an increasing amount of local criticism. Much of this criticism highlights the implicit elitism and privilege of foreigners and wealthy Mexicans who can choose to live in the city’s most walkable, bikeable, and trendy neighbourhoods, a reality that is completely disconnected from that of most Mexicans. Furthermore, much of the popular global attention, especially within the English-speaking world, discusses the ‘discovery’ of Mexico City, ignorant of colonization and the fact that the city has long been a cultural leader, attracting notable artists, academics, and other professionals throughout its extensive and complex history.

This leads to the not-so-rosy side of the development of bike lanes and other sustainability infrastructure in Mexico City: the unintentional reinforcement of extreme class divisions that have always characterised the city. More specifically, much of this new infrastructure has been built in the most privileged, central-city, trip-dense areas of the city despite the need, existing cycling mode share, and lack of sustainability infrastructure in other, economically-disadvantaged areas of the city, such as Iztapalapa. In other words, a more trendy, sustainable Mexico City is leaving behind many residents who remain in poverty and disconnected from the cultural and political elites. In fact, many of these investments, such as the aforementioned pedestrianization of Madero Street, can be considered textbook examples of displacement, mainstream globalization, and gentrification. It is also important to note, that despite major improvements, by many accounts Mexico City still remains a scary place to ride a bicycle.

What do we do? For starters, we need to accept that this is an issue in many cities, not just in Mexico City, and that we as planners need to pay more attention to the local context of the cities in which we work. Cities are increasingly being planned based on global best practices that travel between cities through international exchanges and conferences. However, the implementation of such planning best practices can lead to varied outcomes within different political, cultural, and institutional contexts. An urban planning policy, for example, that has certain outcomes in New York City cannot be assumed to have the similar ones in Mexico City. Even more, sometimes the outcomes of a best practice policy may look similar on the surface (e.g., bike lanes or a bike share system), yet the underlying impacts in terms of gentrification, inequality, and institutional change can differ significantly. It is to these ‘less visible’ outcomes that planners need to turn in an attempt to create more equitable cities. Furthermore, in Mexico City, we must recognize that inequality is a systematic problem with deep historical roots that can be seen across sectors (including the destruction and associated relief efforts following the devastating earthquakes that hit the city and country on September 7th at 19th, 2017).

How bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is implemented in Mexico City in terms of equality has important implications. As one of the world’s most populous and complex cities, it is a large-scale example of a global trend where planning is attempting to create more sustainable cities. The city also highlights how equality is often lost in the planning process. Can sustainability truly be achieved without increased equality? Or will “sustainability” continue to be something that disproportionately benefits the wealthy? Such questions are of utmost importance in an era of international economic policy, rising economic inequality, and increasing environmental degradation. How planners integrate sustainability with questions of equality will be the true test in creating more livable cities, in Mexico City and beyond. Toronto would do well to consider these issues as well, as the broadly downtown-centric bike plan slowly unrolls, with even less investment in the poorer suburban neighbourhoods lacking good transportation and access options.

July 29, 2016

A battery-powered, folding bike in Jerusalem. Photo credit: Michelle Kearns Toronto Cycling Think and Do Tank.

The most popular type of bike in Jerusalem is folding, battery-powered, and electricity-assisted. Buses aren’t equipped with bike racks and many people reside in apartments, so the folding capability allows for easy transport and storage. A Hebrew U professor remarked that these bikes are a relatively new addition to Jerusalem streets, but you’d be hard-pressed to find someone riding anything else—it’s a city of electric converts. On hot days, the extra battery-powered boost opens doors to cycling as a sustainable transportation choice for people of varied fitness levels. This technology helps to overcome challenges posed by environmental circumstances and makes a case for fostering bicycling infrastructure in cities with terrain or climate challenges.

Our group spoke with many local professionals of all backgrounds. Deputy Mayor Tamir Nir was kind enough to meet with our group to talk about transportation in Jerusalem. The conversation reminded me of Toronto’s own struggle to make sense of how to best use road space. Automobile traffic in Jerusalem is no different than the rest of the world—it’s aggressive, loud, and busy. Public transportation in the holy city is crucial, since the city include a large population of very poor people, of both Jewish and Muslim faiths. Nir has become a champion for bike infrastructure development. He spoke about how difficult it can be to change minds on council regarding cycling as a legitimate form of transportation—something that is very familiar to those of us who watch council debates in Toronto. He continues to work on that conundrum. The Deputy Mayor is also part of the team leading the planning and building of Jerusalem’s LRT system, which opened its first line in 2011.

Nir spoke to two significant controversies about the LRT project, one Jerusalem-specific and one more familiar to Toronto: 1) Nir wants to provide mobility for the Arab population, create better access to jobs, and build relationships between the two divided sides of the city. 2) The creation of an LRT-only right-of-way on busy central Jaffa Road would remove car parking. After plenty of discussions challenged by virulent criticisms by fellow council members, taxi drivers, and the general car-driving public, the Jaffa Road proposal went through—no cars, only LRTs and bikes. Since this installation, Jaffa Road and the city’s downtown street life has thrived, socially and economically, as local businesses gained a spike in sales from the increased number of pedestrians, cyclists and transit riders accessing their shops and services. Sometimes taking risks, such as LRT-only Jaffa Road, allows new paradigms to shine through as cities slowly move away from mid-century car-centric planning.

Building infrastructure is not a one-size-fits-all system across cities. One Jerusalem-specific challenge includes another project from Deputy Mayor Nir: Jerusalem bike share. The bikes are meeting great opposition from Ultra-Orthodox neighbourhoods who want to preserve their strict electricity and work-free Shabbat. Certain stations won’t be operating on Saturdays in an attempt to strike a compromise, but some religious leaders are still not happy having bike share stations in their neighbourhood.

Like Toronto, Jerusalem is taking gradual steps towards increasing active transportation mode share and dealing with the fallout of some areas being served better than others with active transportation and transit infrastructure. However, Toronto’s lack of infrastructure in some areas of the city does not carry the political freight that it does in Jerusalem, which suffers from a stark infrastructure and opportunity divide between the East and West.

Jerusalem is a complicated city. To my fresh eyes, the cycle infrastructure seemed wonderful—in West Jerusalem. But you cannot speak of Jerusalem without acknowledging incredible hardships faced by those who live in areas where their children have no sidewalks to walk on let alone bike lanes to cycle on. Traffic and cycle infrastructure planning in West Jerusalem is worth some praise–Toronto should take notice of what can be done for a city by taking risks, such as removing parking on a main road so LRTs can move seamlessly. Toronto, however, needs to ensure that improving active transportation infrastructure is geographically and socially equitable.

The Toronto Cycling Think and Do Tank’s Scarborough Cycles project is one step towards understanding how active transportation can work in areas typically (and erroneously) thought to be homogenously car-dependent. Continuing to take context-specific cues from cities across the world and adapting their steps towards building an active transportation network will help Toronto be the city it so desperately wants to be—one where we can move through the streets safely, quickly, and without fear, by foot, bike, or other modes of transportation
​

June 6 2016

This post by Trudy Ledsham, is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Trudy is a researcher for both the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank and the Scarborough Cycles Project at the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, a project of Clean Air Partnership. Scarborough Cycles is funded by the Metcalf Foundation’s Cycle City program, which aims to build a constituency and culture in support of cycling for transportation.

A common narrative in discussions of urban suburban divides is that suburbanites both love and own automobiles while city dwellers live car free. This is a deeply rooted assumption that quietly justifies the lack of investment in alternatives to cars in suburban areas. A deeper examination of Scarborough suggests that the idea of monolithic suburban car ownership is a myth. Many households within Scarborough do not own a car and a smaller proportion of Scarborough residents has a driver’s license compared to residents in the core.
Mapping is a wonderful tool that allows people to see spatial patterns. But those patterns are completely dependent on the geographic frame, variable or unit of measure that the cartographer chooses. When automobile ownership is examined for Toronto as a whole, it can appear that households in areas like Scarborough all have cars. It is true that household car ownership is higher in Scarborough with an average of 1.3 vehicles per household than in the downtown core (former city of Toronto) where the household average is 0.7 vehicles per household. But this measure does not take into account the number of people in a household. In Scarborough, there is an average of 2.9 persons per household while in the core there are only 1.9 persons per household. If examined on a per person basis, Scarborough has 0.44 cars per person while the city core has 0.36 cars per person–still lower but not as extreme (Table 1). And yes, households in Scarborough have more children than households in the core with 18% of the population aged 0 to 15 compared to only 8% in the core. While not including children in per capita measures might more accurately reflect car ownership, it doesn’t necessarily relate to travel needs. Children also need to travel and walking, cycling and transit are more challenging for parents and caregivers in areas with low transit service levels, little cycling infrastructure and poor walkability.[1]

Scarborough surprises in other ways. The median trip length for drivers is 5.2 km in Scarborough versus 4.9 km in the city core—a negligible difference. In the key 6AM to 9AM travel period, drivers from the core actually travel further than drivers in Scarborough (median trip distance 7.9 km versus 6.5km). In the literature on factors influencing car ownership, a higher % of the population licensed to drive is generally related to higher levels of car ownership[2]. Based on this we would expect the core to have a smaller proportion of residents with drivers’ licenses than Scarborough. However, both men and women in Scarborough are actually less likely to have a driver’s license than residents in the core, with only 54% of women in Scarborough having a license. Given that women account for a higher proportion of the population in Scarborough than in the core (52% vs 50%–see Table 2) the disparity is pronounced, resulting in a much lower number of drivers in Scarborough than would be expected, based on car ownership.
Given the lack of alternative travel options within Scarborough, .44 cars per person is very low. Scarborough has a higher proportion of women and seniors as well as children than the city core — there is also a slightly higher proportion of lone-parent families and a higher proportion of 1st generation immigrants in Scarborough than in the city as a whole. Many travellers are likely avoiding discretionary trips and adding extra miles to their commutes to drop off a series of family members, while others suffer long trips using sporadic or remote public transit. Disparity in transportation access is intimately linked to inequality in social, environmental and health conditions and outcomes[3], making transportation access in Scarborough an even more urgent priority, as Scarborough has both poor transportation access and high levels of vulnerable populations.If we look at a map of car ownership in Scarborough (Figure 1), we find that many households do not have even a single car. There are pockets of Scarborough where more than 38% of households do not own cars. These pockets are consistently distant from higher order transit services. We also see that in Scarborough, the limited cycling infrastructure available (especially bike lanes) is all located in areas of high car ownership. This leaves those without cars completely dependent on walking and bus service.
Toronto’s suburbs are not monoliths of single family homes with multiple cars. Given the long time horizon on transit infrastructure improvement and current limited active transportation options, Scarborough residents urgently need prompt investment and rapid implementation of active transportation infrastructure and programming.

25 May 2016

​Photo of City of Toronto | Cycling Network Plan Scarborough York District. Map Credit: City of Toronto

​This post by Marvin Macaraig, Ph.D., is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Marvin is the Scarborough Cycles Project Coordinator at the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, a project of Clean Air Partnership. Scarborough Cycles is funded by the Metcalf Foundation’s Cycle City program, which aims to build a constituency and culture in support of cycling for transportation.
​
On May 16th, the City of Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure Committee (PWIC) recommended that City Council increase annual capital funding to $16 million for the proposed Ten Year Cycling Network Plan. This figure was recommended by Transportation Services staff and roughly doubles the City’s annual spending on cycling infrastructure. The plan calls for a total of 525 km of new cycling infrastructure throughout the city, including 280 km of bicycle lanes or cycle tracks on what the staff report refers to as ”Fast, Busy Streets”, 55 km of sidewalk-level boulevard trails also along ”Fast, Busy Streets”, and 190 km of cycling routes on ”Quiet Streets”.
In a previous post, I highlighted what Scarborough residents could expect from this new plan. To re-cap, building cycling infrastructure on major corridors like Kingston Rd., Danforth Ave., and Midland Ave. would improve transportation options, especially in southwest Scarborough, which has the highest levels of cycling mode share.
Therefore, it is promising that sections of both Danforth Ave. (between Broadview Ave. and Danforth Rd.) and Kingston Rd. (between Danforth Ave. and Eglinton Ave. E.) are slated for major corridor studies during the first three years of the plan in 2017 and 2019 respectively. A major corridor study is used in locations that would achieve an important cycling network link but where the streets are already intensely used for a wide range of existing activities. As part of the study, traffic impacts are assessed and affected stakeholders, such as residents and business owners, are consulted before new cycling infrastructure is introduced.
Another notable feature in the plan is the potential to install sidewalk-level boulevard trails along Fast, Busy Streets where space is available. This is significant because currently there are limited examples of this kind of cycling infrastructure in Scarborough (e.g., Ellesmere Rd. between Helicon Gate and Military Trail). Installing sidewalk-level boulevard trails should be further investigated and widely implemented since they have the potential to unlock latent demand for suburban cycling without the need for costly and prolonged road reconfigurations. Unfortunately, the plan identifies possible installation of sidewalk-level boulevard trails in only three locations: 1) Midland Ave., scheduled for 2022-2024, 2) Warden Ave. between Highway 401 and Bamburg Cir., scheduled for 2025, and 3) near Warden Station on St. Clair Ave. E., scheduled for 2019.

​Ellesmere Rd. and Military Trail. Photo Credit: Google Maps

This $16 million of cycling infrastructure investment is encouraging, however it should be noted that PWIC members also voted to put on hold all of the planned eight major corridor studies (with the exception of three short segments on Bloor St. and Yonge St.), representing 100 km of the 525 km of cycling infrastructure. Members argued that this would allow time to gather feedback and data from the Bloor St. bike lane pilot project scheduled for installation in fall 2016, and provide an opportunity for upper levels of government to fund these future studies.
Technically, the eight major corridor studies for 17 segments of Yonge St., Danforth Ave., Bloor St., Kingston Rd., Midland Ave., Jane St., Kipling Ave., and Lake Shore Blvd. W., were not scheduled to start until after two years, so the practical implication of a two-year delay remains unclear. However, several of these corridor studies are scheduled for areas outside of the downtown core where the roadway widths, vehicular speeds, on-street parking and loading issues are quite different to downtown. As a result, the Bloor St. bike lane pilot outcomes, to be revealed in late 2017, would likely have negligible relevance for major corridors in Scarborough, Etobicoke, and North York. Given the historical neglect of cycling infrastructure in Toronto’s suburbs, this further delay will more firmly entrench the infrastructure gap between the downtown core and the outer neighbourhoods of our city.
A ­May 2016 Angus Reid Forum poll revealed that 88% of Scarborough residents support a comprehensive, interconnected and safe cycling network. In addition, 69% of Scarborough residents said that the City urgently needs to create better bike infrastructure. The poll also revealed other important insights such as the absence of an urban/suburban divide when it comes to support for the completion of a safe cycling network and that there is support across the city for immediate increased investment in cycling infrastructure. Finally, the poll results also showed that a majority of residents feel that physically separated bike lanes would facilitate traffic movement.
All things considered, Toronto’s new plan will eventually help to address several key gaps in Scarborough’s existing cycling network, including Danforth Ave. and Kingston Rd. Building cycling infrastructure on these corridors will also leverage the efforts of our Scarborough Cycles bike hubs located at AccessPoint on Danforth and Birchmount Bluffs Neighbourhood Centre, near Kingston Rd., both of which are offering several programs to help build and develop cycling culture in Scarborough. On June 7th, Toronto City Council will decide whether or not we will move ahead to create a city-wide safe cycling network that equitably serves all areas and residents in the city, or whether we will risk further delaying this critical transportation option for generations to come.

December 11, 2015

This post by Marvin Macaraig, Ph.D., is part of Spacing’s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Marvin is the Scarborough Cycles Project Coordinator at the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, a project of Clean Air Partnership. Scarborough Cycles is funded by the Metcalf Foundation’s Cycle City program, which aims to build a constituency and culture in support of cycling for transportation

Over the past year, the City of Toronto initiated a citywide public consultation process on a new ten-year Cycling Network Plan. The staff plan, recently presented to Toronto’s Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, aims to expand and improve the cycling network and build much needed cycling infrastructure across the entire city, with 41 km of on-street bike lanes proposed for 2016 alone.

In a previous post, I explained how small local investments in Scarborough’s cycling infrastructure could improve livability, safety, and prosperity, especially in communities with limited transportation options. This post examines Toronto’s proposed Cycling Network Plan and the potential impact that cycling investments could have in Scarborough.

Starting in 2014, the City began collecting cycling route data using a free mobile app. This data was analyzed and used to develop the Cycling Network Plan. Then from April to June of this year, the City conducted a survey containing 24 questions, and collected over 10,500 responses. The City also gathered input from public drop-in events and also utilized an online mapping tool to help visualize a draft plan, which highlighted potential routes on ‘Proposed Major Corridors’, ‘Fast Busy Streets’, and ‘Quiet Streets’.

Some highlights from the survey include; 88% of respondents stated that the cycling budget should be increased in order to quickly expand/upgrade the cycling network; protected bike lanes/cycle tracks are what the City should focus on; and the City should build bikeways that support the travel patterns preferred by commuter cyclists as opposed to off-street routes in parks and greenspaces. The survey results can be found here.

The online mapping tool used by the City to capture feedback identified some major transportation corridors where the installation of cycling infrastructure would improve connectivity both within and beyond the core. Some of the major roads identified on the online mapping tool included Yonge St., Bloor St., Lake Shore Blvd., Danforth Ave., Kingston Rd., and Midland Ave. (N.B., The City’s online mapping tool is no longer accessible online.) Also of interest, in the 2016 Implementation Program of the Cycling Network Plan is a proposed bike lane pilot project on Bloor St. between Shaw Ave. and Avenue Rd. The installation of Bike lanes on the Bloor-Danforth corridor has been a long sought after goal of cycling advocates for decades and the topic of two separate research reports on the economic impact of bike lanes on Bloor St. published by TCAT (2009, 2010) and a third featuring Danforth Ave. produced by Ryerson (2014).

The 2016 Implementation Program focuses on the immediate expansion of the on-street bikeway network in the downtown wards to try to meet the demand of a recent explosion of cyclists. Cycling infrastructure improvements in Scarborough will likely be included in the full ten-year plan due next spring, which will provide a longer-term implementation schedule.

Future improvements in Scarborough particularly on Danforth Ave. and Kingston Rd. would greatly enhance east-west connectivity to other major roadways (i.e., Lawrence Ave. E., Eglinton Ave. E., St. Clair Ave. E., Danforth Ave. and Queen St. E.). As a long time Scarborough cyclist, I can attest that bike lanes on Kingston Rd. would improve transportation options for communities like Birch Cliff, Cliffside, Cliffcrest, Scarborough Village, and Kingston Galloway/Orton Park, some of which have seen only piecemeal cycling infrastructure investment over the past few decades.

Currently, Kingston Rd. is serviced by a several TTC bus/streetcar routes (i.e., Routes 9, 12, 22, 69, 86, 102, 116, 198, 502, 503), none of which travel its entirety, and thus a contiguous bike lane on Kingston Rd. would provide a direct and safer option for cyclists to get downtown to connect to the Dundas St. E. bike lanes or the Waterfront Trail. Research by the Toronto Cycling Think and Do Tank reveals that southwest Scarborough along Kingston Rd. has the highest levels of cycling mode share in all of Scarborough, and infrastructure investment here has potential to increase cyclists safety in these communities.

It should be noted that much of Kingston Rd. is a wide six-lane roadway that includes a paved centre median, and thus it could potentially be reconfigured to include protected cycle tracks while maintaining the existing lanes. The corridor is also identified as an avenue in the Official Plan and thus designated for mid-rise development with the goal of creating neighbourhood destinations.

Proposed bike lanes for Midland Ave. would also help address the limited number of cycle-friendly north-south connections in Scarborough where major infrastructural barriers include Eglinton Ave. E., Highway 401, Sheppard Ave. E., and Finch Ave. E. Bike lanes on Midland Ave. would also make important connections to the Gatineau Hydro Corridor Trail and would help leverage the improvements to Eglinton Ave. E. associated with the Eglinton Crosstown LRT.

Key gaps in Scarborough’s cycling infrastructure were articulated throughout the City’s research phase of developing a new Cycling Network Plan. However, it looks like the only new bike project for Scarborough in 2016 is the extension of the Gatineau Hydro Corridor Trail eastwards to connect to the Conlins Rd. bike lane. Scarborough residents will need to rally together to ensure that proposed bike infrastructure improvements for Scarborough – like Kingston Rd. and Midland Ave. – are in the next phase of the plan.

May 22, 2015

-This post by Jeffrey Trieu is part of Spacing‘s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think and Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Find out more about the think tank, and the series, here.

With countless community events being hosted from May 25th to June 25th, the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area is anticipating Bike Month 2015. Municipalities and community groups alike are hosting the A to Z in bike events, from food incentivized group rides to bike repair crash courses. Although cycling mode shares are still relatively low in Toronto, they are trending upwards; hence, the cause for celebration! In fact, in a two decade long review of trends in cycling rates, infrastructure, and policies, John Pucher and his colleagues suggest that many large North American cities, including Toronto, are undergoing a bicycle renaissance. According to Transportation Tomorrow Survey data[1], all adult age demographics (including seniors!) have seen an increase in cycling rates in the past decade and half. In 2001, 1.18% of all trips were taken by a bicycle for folks 18 years of age and older. Ten years later in 2011, this rate has risen to 1.96%.

However, cycling in Toronto has not been booming for all its residents, particularly those who would benefit most from a transportation mode unrestricted by age-enforced licensing. Cycling rates for Toronto youth have remained stagnant over the recent past and in some cases, have seen decline. In 2001, 1.02% of all trips were taken by a bicycle for Torontonians aged 11 to 17. This rate inched to 1.04% in 2011. Moreover, in Ron Buliung and colleagues’ examination of school travel patterns among Toronto youth, bicycle trips comprised 1.7% of school trips in 1986, then dropped to 0.8% in 2006.

This Toronto youth cycling trend is quite contradictory to the contemporary public health emphasis on youth physical (in)activity. Sixty minutes of physical activity is the daily recommended dose for young folks, yet only 4% of Canadian adolescents are achieving this benchmark. The bicycle combines physical activity with utility; biking simply to get to everyday destinations is a feasible means to sneak in exercise. Moreover, the backseat generation lacks opportunities to be independently mobile – free to travel in their urban space as they wish. Here, the bicycle may be framed not only as a tool for physical health, but for exploration and autonomy as well.

It is quite exciting then, that this year’s Bike Month will be accompanied by the region’s inaugural Bike to School Week from May 25th to the 29th. Over 100 schools (and counting!) across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area have registered to participate in this week-long event. Registration essentially means that participating schools will be delivering cycling-related events leading up to or during the Week, with the potential opportunity to snag prizes.

Perhaps, it is too early to dub Bike to School Week a celebration of youth cycling in the region as Toronto youth cycling rates have not been climbing upwards as they have been with adults. Numerous factors are at play here: parental fears, lack of infrastructure, inaccessibility, or perhaps concern over helmet head. Still, Bike to School Week has the potential to be something more interesting than a celebration of biking in my eyes. It can be a catalyst for change. The idea of Toronto undergoing a bicycle renaissance is quite uplifting; however, it does not occur over one week or one month. It requires long term investment and engagement from numerous stakeholders, ranging from the chief city planner to the average city cyclist. So as our bicycle renaissance rolls on, let’s not leave behind our youngest companions. Bike Month and Bike to School Week is a time for folks across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, young and old, experienced and uncertain, to hop on a bicycle. Of course, it is healthy and environmentally sustainable. But, let`s not forget, it is also fun.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] The Transportation Tomorrow Survey (DMG, 2014) measures travel modes across the city. If these rates still seem unimpressively low, bike mode shares are substantially higher in particular downtown neighbourhoods. However, suburban-urban cycling is a whole other discussion in itself.

May 7, 2015

This post by Natalie Corbo is part of Spacing‘s partnership with the Toronto Cycling Think and Do Tank at the University of Toronto. Find out more about the think tank, and the series, here.

Google Maps is not the best tool for mapping out a bike route. Not only is the software an unreliable judge of what makes a good cycling street, but it also turns out that scrawling all the relevant intersections on my wrist in Sharpie is pretty confusing. And yet, in many places, trying to memorize a route from Google Maps is the best choice cyclists have for wayfinding.

Although wayfinding broadly refers to all the different ways that people navigate the space they inhabit, most wayfinding initiatives in cities are focussed on designing low-tech systems that make the city easier to navigate without a smartphone. The split-second decisions that cyclists must make are particularly well-suited to good signage, rather than reliance on an app.

There are at least two components to cycling wayfinding. One is having a legible cycling network that is both predictable and easy to navigate on it’s own. At a recent talk on Metrolinx’s new transit wayfinding initative, Applied Wayfinding founder Tim Fendley emphasized the importance of consistency and certainty to make transit, pedestrian or cycling networks accessible and inclusive. He argued that if you can improve predictability and coherence of a network, you can gain the user’s trust, which will then increase transit, pedestrian or cycling use. At the Cycling Think and Do Tank, there is an emphasis on promoting cycling among people who are new to the city and even new to the country. If you constantly get lost, or have to back track, or can’t figure out how to easily get from the Richmond cycle track to Shaw St., then it’s less likely that you will perceive cycling to be a reliable and easy way to get around.

In Toronto then, where the physical bike network can be unpredictable and has significant gaps, the other component of wayfinding is to make it easier to find these disparate routes via signage. In Vancouver, where I have lived most of my life, I can usually be certain that any time a designated cycling route ends, there will be a big, green sign pointing me in the direction of a different bike route. I also know exactly what size, style, and colour of sign to watch out for along my journey. When I moved to Toronto, despite my route-planning efforts I have on a few occasions ended up on streets that I felt so uncomfortable cycling on that I’ve walked my bike a few blocks. I’m a committed cyclist, and very little could ever discourage me from riding my bike every day. But to a new, more tentative cyclist, the uncertainty of knowing whether or not you will end up on a street you aren’t comfortable riding on may be enough to discourage you from getting on your bike in the first place.

Toronto and Vancouver have their own unique challenges in terms of network legibility. Connecting the gaps in the network is a long-term fix that will hopefully be prioritized in the future. As for signage, Vancouver doesn’t have all the answers, but they have implemented some strong ideas that could work for other cities like Toronto. One aspect of Vancouver’s design is simply following good signage guidelines: the colour and size of cycling signs is consistent across the city, and the signs are large enough to be visible and legible from a distance. Unlike the few numbered routes here, the cycling routes that cut across different streets are named to be indicative of their path or destination. For example, the “Seaside” bike signage gives a lot of information in just a single word. The street signage is also included in bike wayfinding, as each designated cycle street has a little bike next to the street name at each intersection. This is a good signifier for both cyclists and drivers, who are reminded that the road is for multiple users. Added clarity to cycle crossings at busy intersections is also both a wayfinding strategy and a part of good lane design. Beyond signage, we can also think bigger and look at lighting schemes, pavement treatments and planters as part of the wayfinding strategy.

Toronto has a very high bike mode share in some parts of the city, an embedded cycling culture, and is topographically blessed with a relatively flat road network. Along with these gifts, an effective wayfinding strategy could encourage tons of new cyclists who will support network growth, and cement an even stronger cycling culture in this city.

April 13, 2015

The City of Toronto was awarded a Silver Bicycle Friendly Community Award in 2012 for achievement in the areas of Education, Enforcement, Engineering, Education and Evaluation. In April 2015, the City was awarded Gold for progress made over the last 3 years. Share The Road makes these awards based on the League of American Bicyclists Awards program:http://bikeleague.org/community

Jared Kolb, Executive Director of Cycle Toronto, wrote members this letter in response.

I love riding my bike in Toronto. In fact, I love it so much I spend my working life advocating for safer streets. But today, Toronto was awarded a Gold Bicycle Friendly Community Designation at the Ontario Bike Summit. I want to tell you about why I wasn’t there to celebrate it with them.

When I think of gold, I think of a place that younger people and older adults would ride with ease. Yet what I hear most from Torontonians is that they’re by and large too afraid to ride. For every safe cycling street like Harbord there are 10 Steeles and Morningsides. We need a city-wide minimum grid of protected lanes and bicycle boulevards to invite all Torontonians to ride.

When I think of gold, I think of a place with few collisions. Yet in Toronto in 2012, there were 1,475 cyclists struck by cars. That’s one every 6 hours every day of the year. In 2013, 4 people were killed while riding their bikes. We shouldn’t have to take our lives in our hands when we ride.

When I think of gold, I think of huge numbers of people traveling by bicycle for everyday trips. While a few neighbourhoods in the downtown boast impressive mode share as high as 20%, city-wide, only 2% of people ride regularly. 55% of all trips Torontonians make are less than 7 km, which takes the average person about 30 minutes to ride. But we need leadership from City Council to cultivate cycling’s city-wide potential.

When I think of gold, I think of significant investments in mass cycling. We spend more than $6,000 per person per year in Canada on health care, yet in Toronto, we spend only $3.08 per capita on cycling infrastructure. Ottawa spends more than $8 per person on cycling. Doubling cycling’s budget is long overdue.

Toronto is fortunate to have an ever-more talented group of staff implementing bicycle infrastructure at the City. Cycling events and programs across the city are fantastic. And I’m encouraged by the City’s recent move to pilot protected bike lanes on Richmond and Adelaide and extend them east to Parliament this summer.

The momentum is shifting. We should use the gold award not as a goal that’s been achieved, but as a rallying point to drive our work forward. We need to demand more from our elected officials. 73% of Torontonians say they want to ride more but that on-street safety is holding them back. We know cycling is the best way to get around town and we need to rally together and demand better infrastructure. Over the coming months we’re going to ask you to take action to build safer streets for all and create a more people friendly Toronto.

There’s a reason why cyclists are the happiest commuters. Riding a bicycle is awesome. Take a ride along Harbord and you can’t help but feel inspired. People who ride bicycles in Toronto have hearts of gold. Let’s use this moment to do better as a city and invest more in cycling to truly unlock its potential.

Ride Safely,

Jared Kolb

Executive Director

jared.kolb@cycleto.ca