city hall

University Ave bike lane: proposed summer pilot project

Separated bike lanes are planned as a summer pilot project for University Avenue. It should prove to be the new scapegoat for traffic congestion by the media, and a new focus for the so-called "war on cars", despite staff showing that traffic capacity will not be affected at all (just as many cars will flow up and down University as before). But reason be damned.

City staff have submitted a bikeway network report to public works proposing the University Ave project along with a number of other items, including sharrows on Spadina, a short bike lane on Bay, and so on.

The pilot University lane will start at Hoskin's on the north side of Queen's Park and down to Richmond. At the end of summer the bike lane will be removed and the results analyzed. It will then be up to the new city council to approve a permanent bike lane.

The Star reports:

University currently has four traffic lanes in each direction with a centre median, but it could be reduced to three lanes, with one lane given over to bicycles, a staff report says.

Having bikes run in the centre lanes beside the median would allow the curb lanes to continue to be used for stopping, parking, vendors and taxis, the report added.

Mississauga's gonna put in 30 km of bike paths/lanes a year for the next 20 years. Wow. Meanwhile in Toronto, some people trying to get the top job are trying to stop the Bike Plan. What kind of topsy-turvy world do we live in?

This isn't that unusual. Mississauga is likely building most of its bike paths and lanes so they don't impose on car traffic lanes, whereas Toronto doesn't have this choice since the only choices often are to ride on major roads. Just take a look at their site, which puts trails front and center (which means it still has to grow up quite a bit to be a real cycling city).

The city currently has 350 kilometres of bicycle paths, but they’re mostly in parks. It wants to add a further 600 kilometres, at a rate of 30 kilometres per year over the next two decades, including bike lanes and paths connecting major arterial streets throughout the city.

The system would connect major transit hubs and other key destination points, the goal being to get people cycling to work, school and other major destinations. The project, which aims to put 95 per cent of residents within a kilometre of a major cycling route, would also include parking facilities at transit locations and city facilities.

Currently only about 0.3 per cent of all vehicles on the roads in Mississauga are bicycles; the city hopes to boost that to 10 per cent.

In case you haven't noticed, it's an election year in Toronto, and right-wing candidate Rossi in a bid to win some right-wing votes has made some bold statements about stopping unsafe and environmentally unsound bike lanes.

Rossi doesn't want bike lanes on arterial roads like University, Bloor and Jarvis. But apparently he's a big fan of bike lanes all the same, so long as they are only installed where they aren't needed: on cul-de-sacs and quiet residential streets, apparently.

“I’m not only OK with bike lanes, I’m a big fan,” Rossi said. “I do believe in an expanded bike lane network, but we need to do it on a grid basis and we need to use safer routes to travel.”

He’d prefer to have a fact-based discussion about bike lanes rather than a mud-slinging fight, and base it on getting everyone around the city safely and quickly.

Of course, Rossi isn't engaging in some sort of urban planning, based on studies and reason; he's engaging in vote winning and he's willing to say whatever it takes. Rossi is trying to shape the conversation with a "father knows best" approach: "You poor cyclists, why do you want to risk yourselves on the all those fast cars? Those city planners are so irresponsible by trying to put bike lanes there instead of quiet side roads."

I got an email from the Mayor this morning (as did James at Urban Country). Mayor Miller isn't abandoning public bikes and is directing staff to look for other funding options. He mentions Bikeshare, which was run by the Community Bicycle Network and had a hard time getting enough funding from the city to sustain itself too:

Thank you for your email letter.

We appreciate you taking the time to write.

Until 2006 Toronto was home to the innovative and award-winning Bikeshare community bicycle-lending program. Following its collapse the City began developing a business case for a public bike program.

The City considered launching such a program using the Vienna business model (which is also used in Lyons and Paris) where it is provided free to the City and affordable to users because it is supported by revenue from billboards on the bike stations. After much deliberation it was decided not to increase the number of billboards on the street and launched a competitive process to find a company to provide a non-ad-supported version.

A public tender was issued and City Council gave staff authority to negotiate with BIXI, which is owned by the Montreal municipal parking authority, to develop a detailed business plan for launching and operating a Toronto public bicycle system at no cost to the City. Unfortunately, the outcome of these negotiations did not guarantee that there was no risk of costs being incurred.

Looks like our post yesterday wrangled up some official statements and a hit in mainstream media. Gary Welsh, manager of Transportation Services told the National Post, "At this point in time we can’t seem to operate a public bike system at no cost to the city, which is contrary to what council proposed."

Mr. Welsh assures us that negotiations continue:

“This doesn’t mean the program is being abandoned, we’re still looking at the viability of the program and how we can enable it in the future,” Mr. Welsh said.

“I think it would be beneficial to the city. It’s needed by residents of Toronto and we’re just trying to develop a system that we know will work and something that will not be a significant cost to the city.”

The official line is being awefully vague: just what is going to cost more? Through the grapevine I've heard that, in fact, the staff were able to negotiate a "No Cost" deal with Bixi (but we'll take all the benefits, thank you very much), but that it required a loan guarantee, which the City Manager's office quickly squelched.

Aren't the staff supposed to produce a report for City Council? City Council and the general public should hear in more detail about what happened and this shouldn't just die and disappear within the city bureaucracy.

Bixi, Montreal's successful bikesharing system, is catching on like wildfire and will be expanding to Minneapolis, Melbourne, Boston and even London, UK, this year. But Toronto seems unconvinced, and it appears as if city bureaucrats are close to derailing it.

City Manager bureaucrats seem not to understand the point of bikesharing and, from what I've heard from sources, that they don't see how it would work. An acquaintance has heard from City Manager number crunchers that they don't see Bixi as viable and thought it was waste of money (I'm paraphrasing here). The City Manager's office at City Hall is key to organizing city services and has the ear of council. According to the website, it "guides the Corporation of the City of Toronto and advises Council in the management of all its fiscal, organizational and service challenges. The City Manager is accountable to Council for the policy direction and program delivery of divisions."

This same acquaintance, who is also an avid cyclist, attempted to show how, in fact, Bixi has worked elsewhere and thought it would work here. My other source shows that this attempt may not have been all that successful. The City Manager's office might not be getting behind bikesharing. If they manage to derail it this year, it may take some time for the bureaucracy to get around to doing it again.

The City is coming close to a deal for a bikesharing program. I heard through the grapevine that it might even launch by July (though it would be tough). There are two main hurdles with get this up and running: financing and station locations. The program is supposedly going to operate year-round, which would be great, but which increases the difficulty of finding appropriate locations. I imagine the staff are having a hard time finding any unclaimed space, and would have to pay the Toronto Parking Authority for lost car parking revenue.

The City, I've been told, is close to figuring out the financing. Bixi will have to put forward a big chunk, which they'll recoup in usage fees. The CIty is making deals with some mysterious interests who are probably providing some cash in exchange for exposure. It's all made more difficult that the deal has to be at no cost. It's rare for a public service to have such demands on it, so it's commendable that the staff have been able to get this far. It also says something to how bikesharing has progressed and how cycling infrastructure is such a good deal: no digging, no gas bills, no ticket collectors, no operators. Cheap.

So, anyway, I'd like to bring your attention to the styling of the bikes (hence the image of the yellow bike). Maybe we could come up with a great look for the bikes and present our ideas to the City (I haven't thought it all through).

City staff revealed a politically ambitious bikeway plan for downtown to a very packed house, Monday evening at Metro Hall. Even though the plan includes a number of items which don't require council approval, including bike boxes on Harbord and bike sharrows along streetcar routes, the most politically controversial may be such items as bike lanes on University (as the Post predicts as well). See the whole plan on the City's website (pdf) [this links only to the announcement and not the plan. oops!].

Councillor Joe Mihevc commended the staff for their ambition (even if it may still be just a stepping stone since some activists pointed out that it was still a fractured network). Then Mihevc explained how it was a really politically tough year; if cyclists present a strong, single voice to politicians, we may have a chance of getting this program implemented.

Cyclists seemed to be divided on whether this represented a turning point or not, but it is apparent that even if some cyclists see this as too little, there is a certain segment of voters and certain mayoral candidates (Rossi, and possibly, Smitherman) who see this is way too much "coddling" of cyclists.