Sharrows on Bloor a sign of times a-changing

The first sentence in this article is bs. The downtown bike network is nowhere near complete, even by the standards of the anaemic bike plan documents.

I would happily trade all bike infrastructure for more smooth pavement on regular roads, but among the popular bike planner tools, I like sharrows best. No lines that confuse or confine, no silly idea that cars and bikes must be kept seperate, a message sent. That's good enough for me.

When it comes to all of this stuff, there's a guy I read that is very hard for me to argue with. Read This.

I agree with Luke that the downtown network is a patchwork - and Bloor is one of the main roads that would help us all out.
The sharrows are better, and it was a surprise - yes a pleasant one - to see them go in. The spacing is far too distant though - maybe like Wellesley, there will be more added in time. It is helping keep cars away from the currb and leaving space, and there are a lot of courteous and careful drivers out there, though I was surprised in "rush" hour traffic yesterday, just how empty a lot of Bloor actually was of cars, though there was a lot of bike traffic. Yes!!
As to the City somewhat abruptly putting them in, I wonder why the City didn't say they were going to install these sharrows at the last TCAC meeting where there were some pointed discussions about Bloor St. and biking in this area, and even some motions that are coming up to the Oct. 6 PWIC meeting. Apparently, it may have been such a surprise and just do it sorta thing that even the cycling staff weren't so aware of installation.
So it may be optics, and it's welcome, but still no substitute for planning well in advance. It is a bit frustrating to not be told clearly in advance that sharrows are going in, but that might mean the staff etc. would have to admit that they kinda lied to people when they said bike lanes could go in later.
And to be fairer and less confrontational than that "lied" word, of course bike lanes could go in when i's all smooth and done, just one lane of car traffic would have to be removed in order for that to happen as the curb to curb width of 14M isn't wide enough to allow for bike lane and two car travel lanes in one direction - that extra space is between the planter and the curb.
So it does seem that the City cares more about not having car doors get damaged when they open into the planters rather than real bike safety, which is more European style than a line of white paint,
It's still better, and more sharrows would improve it further.

Although they aren't perfect - sharrows are significantly better than nothing at all. I find there are many drivers out there who think cyclists are only entitled to a foot or a foot and a half of the road and they have every right to squeeze you to hug the curb. It may seem simple, but painting a picture of a cyclist will start to change drivers' resistance to share the lane because the sharrow implicitly shows that cyclists shouldn't be squeezed into the curb.

In my vast cycling experience, I've actually found that drivers give me more space on roads with sharrows. It's probably a subconscious thing and many drivers probably feel they own the lane (subconsciously) when there are no sharrows.

I also see it as a marketing strategy. If you constantly repeat a consistent message, your ad will stick in people's minds. I think drivers will start to be more accepting of cyclists eventually - and this just reminds them that bikes aren't going away anytime soon.

Thanks for posting this Herb!

Progress is being made.

Albeit far too slowly.

While we really need the work on big streets like Bloor/Danforth; I can understand (but not respect) the City ducking this fight for the time being. Just look at the hassle over Jarvis.

We don't want lanes going in that get reversed, or all political capital used on one project.

What really irks me is the 'low-hanging fruit' that remains. The bike lanes no one would object to, but would bring us closer to critical mass.

Downtown:

Elizabeth St: Gerrard to Dundas. Easy to do, no change in traffic lanes, makes and important connection, done with the same fancy sidewalks as north-of-Gerrard, area workers and residents would be thrilled.

Simcoe: Front to Queen. North of King this road is dead 99% of the time. The only squeeze (where one lane might be lost that might hurt traffic is Front to Wellington. Its manageable, and there's a handy vacant parking lot site from which space can be snuck!

East End:

Donlands: Yes, yes, I know Case Ootes hates bikes, but the road doesn't even need to lose a lane from Danforth to O'Connor, and north of that its mostly intermittent street parking, no one would notice or care, except those of us who Cycle.

Laird Drive: North of Millwood this road is not all that busy, and parking is permitted in the curb lanes, but not used very much. Easy take.

Midtown:

Davisville Avenue: Again, quiet road, not that much traffic, parking in curb lanes, easy take.

Scarborough:

Comstock: No lanes need to be lost except Lebovic to Warden, maybe, and no one would notice. (excellent connection to industry and retail running parallel to and south of Eglinton from Pharmacy to Birchmount)

Gerrard: East of Victoria Park, quite partial 4-lane, no on-street parking, easy sell. ****

There are a bunch more.

But if we got these and a few others, and some new bike facilities and paths, I think we could easily double the cycling community in Toronto in 4 years. Ultimately its that growth that will drive the big projects to completion and make them politically palatable.