(Image: IK's World Trip)
Reaction to the city’s announcement of a bunch of new bike lanes yesterday—including a separated one along a chunk of University between Wellesley and Richmond—was swift, immoderate and wildly political. Mr. Rossi, you were saying something to the Sun reporter?
Pulling two lanes of University Avenue out of commission, particularly right now with our transit funding in doubt, is sheer madness. And there is a larger issue of democratic fairness here, too. Bike lanes on arterial roads have emerged as a major issue in this election campaign. I am calling on the mayor to acknowledge the basic rights of the people of Toronto to choose their own future.
Madness! At least as crazy as Rocco Rossi saying bike lanes “have emerged” as an issue, when it’s his campaign that has been beating the drum loudest and longest.
Of course, Rossi is not alone. Bike lane expansion is having a rough time of it with all the mayoral candidates. Of the six quoted by the Sun, only Joe Pantalone supports the new lanes, whereas Rob Ford, Giorgio Mammoliti and Rossi are all predictably against them. George Smitherman, who has turned taking the middle road into not saying anything at all, says we should delay creating new lanes. Sarah Thomson prefers the lanes directly down the centre of University, making ugly every boulevard and left turn.
• Bike lanes on University Avenue [National Post]
• Mayoral candidates’ thoughts on bike lanes [Toronto Sun]
In Vancouver, many people (me included) predicted traffic chaos after our new mayor converted 1 of 4 lanes of the Burrard Street Bridge for bikes.
However, chaos never materialised. Car traffic moves as quickly as ever.
It may be true that bike lanes are expensive and low priority for most, but they don’t actually impede car traffic like certain politicians would have us think.
April 14, 2010 at 1:47 pm | by Josh DI can’t see how having a FOUR-LANE ROAD in the middle of downtown makes any sense. Bike lanes, please!
April 14, 2010 at 1:51 pm | by andrewWhy is the city so fixated with putting bike lanes on busy arteries?
April 15, 2010 at 12:52 am | by JeffreyJust don’t understand why bike lanes are such a big deal!! Don’t we (bike riders) have as much rights as drivers do? Don’t we pay as much taxes as drivers? This shouldn’t be an issue in the first place. Having bike lanes will promote safe biking, thus more people will bike to commute. When I tell my coworkers and friends that I bike in the city, they look at me in amazement and say “Isn’t it dangerous?” This is so over due.
April 15, 2010 at 2:48 pm | by RyBike lanes are designed for safety.
On a street that feeds several hospitals with emergency vehicles speeding through red lights, it is important to ensure that cyclists are safe and protected.
The huge boulevard that runs down the middle of University is too noisy for comfortable use, it is wide enough for trees, flower boxes and bike lanes and could be transformed into safe bike lanes surrounded by flower boxes and trees. Physically separated from traffic on either side. Since the lanes are to go down the centre of University anyway why not compromise and use the empty space in the middle of the boulevard allowing the boulevard to stay in existence and protect the cyclists with trees and flower boxes?
A practical solution that eliminates the war between car and bike.
April 17, 2010 at 10:47 pm | by Sarah Thomson