anthony's blog

After Councillor Howard Moscoe's prodding, City Council has released the previously confidential manual which explains who can get their parking tickets cancelled. I am glad that they did this, and it helps make things much more clear to everyone in this city. Many thanks to Councillor Moscoe, and the other councillors, who made this happen.

Before this manual was released, I had though that more enforcement would help to diminish the number of vehicles found parked in bike lanes. I had also thought that on-street separated bike lanes should be used sparingly and strategically.

I now realize how naive I was.

While I expect that some of the excuses to get one's parking ticket cancelled to be removed from the current manual, I have to expect that many, if not most, of them will remain. Because of this, I now find it necessary to add my voice to the many who are already calling for the conversion of existing bike lanes into on-street separated bike lanes.

The passive enforcement of barriers which would deter people from placing their vehicles in bike lanes seems to be the only remedy we have to keep those of us in this city who ride bikes safe from moving cars and trucks, and to keep bike lanes safe from becoming free parking or ad-hoc taxi stands.

And safer infrastructure will only encourage more people to ride.

Humans, it seems, all love to watch a fight. And our media is only too happy to oblige; this time it's a rematch for Jarvis Street.

In Virginia, R-Braddock District Transportation Supervisor John Cook says "I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device. I think it's a recreation device. The big problem is people don't want to ride their bike in the rain or get sweaty before work." (Washington Examiner, Feb 21 2010) I think that it is good to know what kinds of attitudes we are up against.

I find it rather interesting that after a summer of fuel provided by our media of the "war on the car" that it took so long for yet another case of Road Rage involving a motorist and a cyclist to occur. After all, this city is known for its Bike Rage, as evidenced here:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bike_rage

Toronto is at the top of the list for both "Drivers attacking cyclists" and "Cyclists attacking drivers." How's that for notoriety?

And now, the media's coverage of the Bryan/Sheppard incident is yet another example of Bike Rage that the world sees, like this:

• In Toronto, Bike-Car Road Rage Escalates (NPR, September 7, 2009)

Which leads to believe that the cyclists in the city aren't seeing the love that they've been promised by City Hall or from Queens Park, and that there are forces out there to keep cyclists "in their place." Meanwhile cyclists aren't content to put up with the awful excuse and behaviour that motorists call "driving" on our city's roads. I thought drivers are licensed, but not that you can tell. Motorists act like maniacs, and are constantly risking the lives of pedestrians, cyclists and each other. They have a deadly weapon under their control yet refuse to acknowledge it. No wonder when a motorist hits a cyclist (as Bryant is alleged to have to done to Sheppard) the cyclist "freaks on their hood" (as Sheppard is alleged to have done to Bryant's car).

Here's a short (sales) video of a collapsible bike trailer. I think this is a good idea.
I've often wished for a smaller trailer that wouldn't get in the way when empty. What do you think?

Extra points to those who can tell where it's filmed!

Love 'em or hate 'em, e-bikes have been a hot topic for discussion here.

The province has opened up the discussion of e-bikes, and where they fit into the regulatory framework in Ontario. This follows up on the Stakeholder meeting hosted by MTO on June 16th, and means that everyone can tell the province exactly how they feel the e-bikes pilot has been going, and what how the province should be handling these things going forward. You can through the website and also read the backgrounder.

Comments are due by July 9th. The pilot ends on October 3rd. The referenced document highlights some of the concerns that the province is aware of, and is looking for specific feedback on, such as:

There’s a feeling “out there” that because motorists pay “user fees” for licences and registration as well gas taxes and insurance, that they somehow have more “rights” to the road than everybody else. And that because motorists pay for those things, somehow motorists are more “responsible” that the rest of society which includes lowly cyclists.

Let’s dispel a myth today. It is my assertion that motorists are, in fact, acting much less responsible than they claim, and further, that they are to blame for a lessened quality of our public spaces.

First off, there are plenty of articles about who pays for the roads, including articles on this very blog. I’ll refer the reader there to read these entries, and I won't bother repeating those arguments.

My copy of the driver’s handbook, copyright 2007, has written in the second paragraph of Chapter 1 that would be motorists “have to pass a test” for “driving privileges.” What this means is that everybody has the same and equal right to share the road, but licensed drivers have the privilege of doing so with an insured and registered motor vehicle. That’s all. Somewhere along the way many seemed to have forgotten this.

The promotion of cycling is essential to building, growing, and sustaining the future culture of cycling.

The City of Toronto does its part to promote cycling within the city. Toronto's bike plan includes the promotion of cycling. Bike Month, the Bicycle Friendly Business Awards, and the Ambassador program are but only a few ways that city itself promotes cycling.

Promotion doesn't end with the (would be) cyclists themselves. Promotion can take many forms, and some is aimed to attract and build ridership. But other promotion is meant to encourage investment in cycling infrastructure, including end services (bike parking, etc) at various destinations by businesses and attractions. Governments and businesses also need to know about some of the benefits that cyclists provide to our communities.

Yesterday the public works committee of the City approved a number of bike lanes; accepted the request by Transportation Services staff for "New Strategic Directions" for an updated Bike Plan, including studying a bike lane on Bloor/Danforth; and authorized sole source negotiations for a bikesharing program with the Public Bike System Company of Montreal that also runs Bixi. All these items now go on to City Council for approval.

Gloria Lindsay Luby wrote to council saying that she supported the bike lane on Rathburn, but not on The Westway. With no good reasons to not move ahead, both were approved by the committee. Her token effort was not enough to thwart The Westway's Bike Lines.

Councillor Peter Milczyn had a very good reason to delay the bike lanes on The West Mall; there's an EA going on to bring North Queen to intersect with the West Mall, and he asked staff to both continue this year's rebuild of the road to include the potential for bike lanes, and to include the bike lane planning and implementation as part of the EA process. While this will delay the bike lanes, as long as we continue our push, there's no reason why these won't go in next year. I would suggest contacting Milczyn's office to find out more about that EA.