Toronto's Bixi may be in jeopardy

I've got a few calls in and will report back with any additional info that I can find to confirm or refute this unfortunate news...

"Traffic congestion, pollution and obesity are major issues that we need to deal with right now as the City of Toronto’s population is expected to increase by 3 million people by 2031."

The City of Toronto is only expected to grow by 490,000 people by 2031. It is the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area that is expected to grow by 2.81 million in that time. The distinction is important if you're e-mailing the City of Toronto's council and staff.

Thanks Fact check for pointing out my typo. I have corrected my article, and Herb can update this post. As you mentioned the GTA is expected to grow by ~3 million by 2031, and the City of Toronto is expected to grow to 3 million by 2031 (increase of ~500,000).

Here is the PDF I originally pulled these numbers from: http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/pdf/profile_tor_bulletin.pdf

Perhaps the city is right about having cold feet... after all the war on cars, the negative sentiment drummed up against bicycles in regard to red lights and all this in addition to all the shocking string of cyclist deaths i would say the general opinion on the feasibility of cycling took a huge hit. Not to mention Toronto's motorists know how cyclists are treated since they are dishing out the treatment... i can see why some of them are reluctant to try cycling around let alone crossing the street.

To the poster who asked us to make the case for the city, that is just plain lazy. If the city employees cannot rub two sticks together to get something done and instead expect the private capitalist to come forward and provide services for the public... well then what the hell do we need the city for, fire them all. The only thing missing here is political will, NOT a rock solid case study.

If advocates simply blow too hard on the spark leading to this recent increase in cycling they will simply extinguish it. Maybe Toronto isn't ready, we are certainly nowhere near Montreal in terms of bicycle infrastructure and local sentiment is still largely against cycling.

Too good to be true, I thought. Never mind every city of any size and culture in N.America is reclaiming parts of the city from cars: Toronto which once led the battle against freeways and destruction of streetcars is not not even following the pack, much less leading it.

Let's see - the day this post appears, we get the news of c. $9,000,000,000 operating budget, and lots of increases for somethings, and yet no real hits for some big spenders like the TTC and police.
Hmm, while those were capital tax dollars, the St. Clair project was about twice its initial budget and no benefit to bikes, in fact arguably more dangerous. The cops - hmm - they do fight many bad guys, and they do exist, and there's dangers with the job, but how much of their time is spent on carimes and picking up pieces from the cartillery.
So if the bulk of the bureaucarats and some politicians want to have a program gone, don't get it any money, or starve it, and the more serious implication of such a fate for the Bixi may be to take out a leg or two from the push for a reworking the City core for better biking to support this Bixi program, though we don't truly know what is coming down, or being proposed, and they keep missing obvious parts of Bloor.
At times, I've had darker thoughts about letting some civil servants go and redirecting their salaries towards such better things as Bixi - but if that's too unpopular, and not PC, then let's push the tolls on the Gardiner and the DVP instead if we need money for it.
We do need to have an effective program of bikesharing, and the infrastructure to adequately support it - so ensure any letters to people also express support for "roadical" changes in our core to accompany this program, in fact, do the changes in advance!

St. Jane is lucky not to have to see what this city's becoming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs

I would tend to agree with dances_with_traffic above. Although a successful bike-sharing program would be hugely beneficial to the city down the road, I still dont see how this could be feasible at this point in time. The fact that Montreal's Bixi was a resounding success does not mean that it would work now in Toronto. Montreal has a much more extended bike lane network in the downtown core which makes it safe to just pick up a bike, ride it for 30 minutes and drop it off even if you dont have a helmet with you. In addition, Montreal drivers and pedestrians have been used for many more years to dealing with a large contingent of cyclists and as a result, the environment is much more conducive to a bike sharing program. Toronto simply does not compare (leaving aside the fact that comparison to European cities like Lyon, Paris or Barcelona are even more ridiculous). At this point in time, it seems to me that it is completely unrealistic to imagine someone picking up a bike at say King and Bay and dropping it off at say Yonge and Bloor. Cycling downtown will remain on the fringe until proper biking infrastructure is developed (i.e. bike lanes.).

I say this as an avid cyclist who wishes to see one day a bike sharing program implemented in Toronto. But in the near term, I think the focus of the city should be in implementing its bike plan. Once we have a half-decent bike lane network, we should consider a bike sharing program.

As a Declared Candidate running for Toronto City Council in 2010, and as a cyclist, I support implementing the Bixi program here in Toronto.

Taking full note of the concerns of JG and similar feelings elsewhere in the blogosphere and without diminishing their concerns, if this matter was before me in City Council, I would strongly lean towards voting in favour of funding it and supporting Bixi.

http://twitter.com/HiMYSYeD/status/9296131765

HiMY SYeD

The future success of Toronto is dependent on a burgeoning creative class; a group that rides bikes and sees little value in automobile ownership. It's troubling to see important decisions like Bixi in the hands of bureaucrats.

Why can't we have more bicycle facilities? The people who live and work in Toronto deserve to enjoy the city, it's their home. We waste millions keeping the Gardner Expressway open for commuters who do not pay for its up keep and then complain about traffic congestion and driving in the city, as though we would be better off if it resembled some high speed suburban nightmare. Enough!

Let's make's make Toronto a better place and elect those who get it.

Bixi's a private venture. It wouldn't be a municipal or community initiative.

Look, if we couldn't/wouldn't keep Bikeshare going, how can we expect Bixi to work here?

I would love to see the Bixi program in Toronto, not because I will be using it (I am a commuter with too many bikes already), but to get more bikes on the road.

The reality is, without a more bicycle friendly infrastructure (wider roads, bike lanes, roads that have not been bastardized by construction), the system will not work as well as planned.

The casual user, to whom the system will most likely be marketed towards, is not going to feel safe on the roads that exist today.

If we want to get more people out on bikes, we need more bike friendly streets. Even something as simple as sharrows/chevrons on the roads would do a world of wonder for the bike-curious.

The future success of Toronto is dependent on a burgeoning creative class; a group that rides bikes and sees little value in automobile ownership. It's troubling to see important decisions like Bixi in the hands of bureaucrats.

I am not quite sure what you mean by a "burgeoning creative class", but that phrase evokes visions of the unemployed, ironic hat-and-moustache crowd in my mind.

I would have thought that the future success of Toronto, at least from a bicycle infrastructure perspective, would depend on getting more square worker bees on bikes.

The "burgeoning creative class" are Golgafrinshams like that @$$, Florida. I care about people who do something valuable for society, not fey dead-weight.

I have three bikes, but I would use it enough on short rides to pay my $80y fee. Why? Because once I take it form one dock to another I don't lose anything to bike theft.

Bixi promised the city a no-cost bike share plan but they are now looking to suck money from a nearly bankrupt city. Bike sharing is a great idea and would benefit the city but not at any cost. I am pleased to see council might have actually learned something from the food cart debacle.

There are private companies ready to bid on a no-cost bike share plan. Toronto should not be funding a program like this when private investors are willing to assume the financial risk. If Bixi won't live up the promises they made then its time to give private investors a look.

and surveillance systems in place where the bixi lots would have been... That would be great... and i would pay a monthly fee if the lots were convenient enough. Tired of lugging around 10lbs of locks.

Aside from getting hit by a car, theft is probably the next main thing people are afraid of in the city.

I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it. Is its pattern strange to you? Save me from my burden of kryptonite.

It's funny. Many of the comments I have seen posted on message boards in regards to this issue over the past few days have mirrored a sentiment I have felt for over two years now:

Why did the municipality(be it the bureaucracy or council) not engage the public more about this issue when planning such a massive and important project?

I am not sure there is a simple answer to that question, but let me lay out something for everyone, so they understand whats happening with Bixi, and why a road block has been hit.

Public Bicycle Systems Company is owned entirely by the Montreal Parking Authority. The Montreal Parking Authority is owned by the Municipality of Montreal. Much like Toronto, Montreal has many financial woes, and the 23 million dollars they have invested so far into the venture is significant.

Toronto was only willing to adopt "Bixi" if PBS Company was able to initiate the service with minimal assistance from the municipality. This minimal assistance was not to go beyond the allotment of land(such as sidewalk or parking space) for Bixi stations to go. The thinking was that generally speaking Bike Share systems generate significant revenue, that will hopefully pay for all the capital investment. PBS Company obviously was not able to round up the 11-15 million dollars necessary to open a Toronto Bike Share system. As Montreal is financially stressed as well, it would be very politically unpalatable for a politician there to make a motion to spend such a significant investment for a service in ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY. Toronto is so stressed financially, that we did not intend to afford this through tax dollars. We expected to give the winning bidder the premium space with a premium arrangement, but no funds(which from a business perspective is a FANTASTIC deal). Our City Managers office thinks this project is not the best idea, so they are not willing to support the idea of finding 15 million for a capital investment loan. The irony in all of this is that for Bixi to have qualified to even enter the bidding process, they had to claim they were able to take care of the financial requirements, without assistance. That means one of two things has likely happened:

1. PBS Company had the intention of procuring the capital requirements without the help of Toronto tax dollars. The recession to a stronger hold than expected, and PBS Company did not generate the necessary revenue prior to the initiation of the Toronto Public Bicycles Project, and as a result came to Transportation Services, asking for some help to find the capital requirements.
2. PBS Company never had the intention of providing the necessary capital requirements. It was counting on it's political connections which already helped it snag sole access to the bid. These political connections have obviously fallen through, and are now making a strong effort to lobby in favor of the Toronto City Council agreeing to make a 15 million dollar bridge loan.

It is technically a serious breach of policy for City Hall to give Bixi the funding that Toronto's bike lobby is calling for them to provide. It goes against the tender that the City released, and if Council was to seriously consider Bixi a funding priority, it would be in there best legal interest to reopen the competitive bidding process, and then move forward to fund the winning contractor.

Let's keep our integrity and do what's right.

I would like to see the bidding process reopened, so that a COMPETITIVE bid can occur, which has yet to happen for this project. I would like to see transportation services show us as citizens our options, much like the TTC did when they chose new streetcars. If not, I would like to see the City's bureaucrats get out of the way, and let the free market take care of this service.

What makes anyone think that if our bureaucrats can't handle running a ski hill well, that bureaucrats from Canada's supposedly most corrupt municipal government will be able to run a massive public bicycle system for us here in Toronto?

An article for your thoughts:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/toronto/archive/2010/02/19/busi...

Sincerely,

Matias Marin
CEO Public Nature Corporation
publicnature@gmail.com

PS Public Nature was the only other company to submit an Expression Of Interest for the Toronto Public Bicycles Project. We were not allowed to enter the competitive bidding process, for reasons, that still elude us, and had little to do with our ability to deliver. I encourage anyone interested in this issue to look more deeply into it, and not just believe the talking points being thrown out by a variety of interest groups.

That seems very counter-intuitive. If there is someone at a TCAC meeting who is spouting ideas and opinions you don't agree with, it would be in your BEST interest to show up and make YOUR views heard. If an individual chooses not to do so, how can they blame others for the perceived failures? We all need to show up to TCAC meeting's and speak openly and honestly about pressing issues. If not we need to make those views directly available for consumption for our elected officials and the bureaucrats who initiate mandated directives.. Let's not blame others, and let's all take our individual responsibility. The freedoms left in the society we live in give us the ability to have tremendous levels of productive input. So let's make that input positive.

-Matias

I just heard of a similar concept to the one that Matias is describing.

Locating a central distribution of wind up bikes at the base of the windmill at Exhibition Place, the power of the turning blades is harnessed and transferred to a set of spring coils located around the rear hub of specially designed bikes. Once the maximum potential energy is "wound" into the bike, it is released to power riders effortlessly through the city.

This is from a group named, aptly named Spin Cycle, here is an excerpt from the article:

"We are all set to 'spring' Toronto into the future", said CEO Frank Cranks. Cranks apparently got the idea when he placed a hockey card in his bike spokes on his 8th birthday. " I guess you could say I owe it all to Mike Palmateer", jokes Cranks. Cranks previous endeavours include the opening of the Slinky Museum in Winnipeg.

It looks like the jig is up Matais. The Red Pill people have exposed the dasterdly piezoelectric plot to turn unsuspecting cyclists into a Copper Top servants.

That was a very entertaining if not delusional post Herb. Are you on Bixi's payroll?