A few months ago I was at a FreeGeek "Unconference" where I attended a demo of the SeeClickFix website, which is a "crowd-sourcing" way to report - and fix - problems with your city. SeeClickFix is also selling itself as a service for municipalities so they can get citizens to easily report potholes, broken park benches, litter and so on. During the election campaign, mayoral candidate Joe Pantalone proposed to make the website an integral part of Toronto's 311 service. (Presumably Mayor Ford would hate SeeClickFix as much as he hates 311. It's not entirely clear why he hates the popular 311 service other than that he sees it as competition for his own phone call service.)

At the time of the demo I immediately tested it out by reporting just one of the many, many bad road cuts on Queen Street West. Derek of BlogTO, which recently tried it out as well, noted that Toronto 311 is a watcher for the SeeClickFix Toronto reports. I haven't checked to see if the road cuts have been repaired, i.e. dumped a bit of asphalt in it, but I keep getting reminder emails that the issue in SeeClickFix hasn't been closed. Perhaps it has been fixed but Toronto 311 doesn't close the issues.

Given that Toronto 311provides an excellent service for citizens to report by phone or through their website, I can see that SeeClickFix has less of a draw here than it might in cities where there is no 311 service. Perhaps the biggest benefit of SeeClickFix is that it also has an iPhone app that allows the user to snap a photo, tag it and it will post it automatically with the location. Alas, I don't have an iPhone. If any of you have tried it out, please let us know if you've had success. Likewise, if you've used Toronto 311 directly. Have you had success? How often do you use it?

Like me, perhaps you are wondering why a right-wing politician who had helped to push the "war on the car" meme on the public, had opposed separated bike lanes on University Ave and opposed the Jarvis bike lanes, is now supporting a separated bike lane network for downtown Toronto. It may help to get a bit more of the background.

Alan Heisey pointed out in my previous post that the Toronto Star map and information is incorrect. Heisey's original proposal, which looked like the map attached, also included separated bike lanes to Bathurst and Parliament on Harbord and on Richmond as well as bike lanes extended north of Bloor.

By email Heisey clarified some of the background of this story. Way back in January 2010, Heisey had proposed separating Sherbourne street bike lanes. TCAC (Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee) and Councillor McConnel endorsed it. Back in March 2010, Heisey returned with a petition to separate the lanes on St. George and Beverly. Around this time the City was voting on the University separated bike lanes, but which were narrowly defeated because of a voting error by McConnell. Minnan-Wong hated the idea of bike lanes on University so he proposed Heisey's plan as an alternative before Council. His proposal opposed by a majority of council.

In August, Heisey presented a petition to the public works committee (PWIC) for the entire plan (as pictured above). Councillors de Baeremaker, Heaps of PWIC support the plan. Councillors Perks and Carroll opposed it. Vaughan visits PWIC and opposes it. Minnan-Wong also visits PWIC and supports it. This is the first time that the Toronto Cyclists Union officially supports the network minus the St. George/Beverly separated lanes (though they have changed their position since to include it as well). PWIC decided to have staff report on the network for early 2011.

During the last couple weeks of the municipal election former mayoral candidate Rocco Rossi adopted the entire plan (the map above comes from his website), though his support was conditional on taking out the bike lanes on Jarvis.

According to Heisey, Minnan-Wong was quoted in the media last spring saying he supported snow removal for this core network. This would be critical for separated bike lanes since regular snow plows might not be able to do the job.

I've got lots of questions remaining. If cyclists buy into Minnan-Wong plan does it mean giving up on bike lanes on University and Jarvis? Or give up on the rest of the Bike Plan entirely? Is the bike union now supporting this plan because it will now be even harder to get bike lanes on University?

Heisey's heart is in the right place, but this plan has had much more sympathy on the right than the left for reasons I can only speculate about. During this time the left-leaning politicians were pushing University Ave bike lanes. And we just got Jarvis. Strategically we might lose both of these streets, which would mean less kilometres of bike lanes total (aside from Richmond) in exchange for reconfigured lanes elsewhere. But we also might gain quite a bit, since separated bike lanes, wherever they go in, may result in a significant culture shift and increase the visibility of cyclists.

At this point the biggest barriers to accomplishing this plan comes from Ford's unthinking ideology that is only willing to count people in cars as "traffic" and from Councillor Vaughan who has plans for two way traffic on Richmond and Adelaide which would preclude bike lanes. Vaughan had also opposed separated bike lanes on St. George/Beverly in the media recently, though a bird told me that at some point Vaughan was actually asking staff to investigate such a plan.

Such is the moving target that is politics, that may or may not involve good planning decisions. But at least some of them are taking cyclists seriously.

The city has saved me some trouble from having to do my own research by compiling all the things that they've done this last year. Before I reveal it all, let me list the things that I can remember about 2010:

  • Ten years later survey by the City - The survey found that cycling has become more popular, confirming many of our thoughts. What we didn't realize was the bigger increase in the suburbs.
  • bike corral at 215 Spadina - I made a point of parking my bike in the corral. It was a good feeling that I was respected enough to be given roomy parking in a space previously occupied by a private automobile.
  • Big bike chain sign in Kensington. It's a nice touch that combines utility and branding for this entrance to Kensington Market. My gripe still remains that it is too far away from all the action. Most cyclists don't use it because it's not right in front of the places they frequent.
  • Re-launch of the Ward Advocacy Program of the Toronto Cyclists Union. This was a defining moment - the room at the Brickworks was packed with 80+ people. It was not just a social event like other bike union events, but rather the energy of the room was focused on getting things done locally. We got lots of good ideas from the speakers, city planner Al Rezoski, Dale Duncan former assistant to Councillor Adam Vaughan, bike union founder Dave Meslin. Since then a few ward groups have formed, in particular Wards 18,19, and 20 have met and are now well on the way of making things happen locally.
  • A new amalgamated zoning by-law came into effect. A few bike-friendlier elements have yet to make an impact: new buildings will be required to put in bike parking; developers can reduce their car parking in exchange for more bike parking - a major money saver; and required car parking for buildings has been reduced, particularly downtown. Thanks to the Toronto Cyclists Union and Alan Heisey for pushing some of these changes.
  • The whole bike-riding pinko incident. I really liked Curbside Cycles response of offering a only mildly ironic pink bicycle to Don Cherry as a present. As of this week the bike is still waiting to be picked up and is sitting in the front window of the store. Did the whole name-calling backfire on Rob Ford?
  • Rob Ford got elected. This will make for some interesting times. Almost everyone expects next to no bike lanes, but there will also be a lot of push back from cyclists and downtowners.
  • BIXI Toronto was brought back from the dead. Last winter we found out that city staff had basically killed BIXI because of internal opposition. Once the information leaked out hundreds of bike union members sent letters to councillors and Mayor Miller, thus bringing it back in a smaller form. Despite the difficulty of selling it in smaller form and being required to sell 1000 memberships and get hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorships, it sounds like BIXI Toronto met its goals and will be launching in the Spring. If other cities with bike-sharing systems is any indication this could be a game changer.
  • Bike boxes. A couple years after some unofficial bike boxes appeared on Harbord and Bathurst, the transportation staff finally got approval for bike boxes along Harbord. Even though they ended-up being half-ass version that aren't completely painted in with bright green and don't have a dedicated bike light for making left turns, this is still a underestimated benefit for cyclists. Imagine the bike boxes at Spadina and College, where the city plans to install them next. This chaotic intersection could end up much friendlier for cyclists when they can worry less about right hooks and bike rush hour. Some may say that bike boxes are just a distraction from bike lanes (namely, Mez and Hamish) but I say they are a big benefit and are much easier to get politically.
  • A lot of work and time has been spent on expanding and improving the trails in the hydro corridors in Scarborough and North York's Finch hydro corridor. It's not on the radar of a lot of us cyclists (particularly downtown) but this will be a big addition once finished.
  • Jarvis bike lanes. Notice that the controversy and complaints have died down to nothing. Just like the experts said, taking away the one car lane wasn't going to affect car traffic. Get over it, you doomsdayers.
  • College sharrows. These are quite controversial since cars park right over them outside of rush hour. Do they provide any benefit? Or do they just encourage drivers to block bike infrastructure?
  • Bloor Viaduct bike lane widening and sharrows. Everyone is happy about this and the drivers probably didn't even notice that their lanes got a little bit narrower (with the side effect that they driver slower). The sharrows at the DVP off ramp really help with that dangerous spot for cyclists in danger of getting the right hook.
  • Still nothing done about any of the plans approved about two years ago in the forgotten West End. What about all that public consultation? Where are the contra-flow lanes on Argyle?

Of course, there are things that I just don't care enough about or that I've forgotten so now I turn it over to the Transportation Staff's official list, from the January Cyclometer. I'm going post a summary because I'm not certain that the link will be stable over the long term:

  • Bikeway Network Progress. Approximately 43% of the Bikeway Network has been completed since the Bike Plan was adopted in 2001. A total of 430km of the recommended 1004km of bikeways have been completed as of December 31, 2010. [but only 1/4 of the bike lanes promised].
  • 2010 On-Street Bikeway Network Installations. Jarvis Street bike lanes. Bloor Viaduct bike lane widening. Rathburn. Moore Avenue. Westhumber [where's that?] Lappin-Hallam [years after the unofficial sharrows]
  • Bike boxes
  • Dufferin Street Tunnel and bike lanes. [we need bike lanes under all underpasses in the city!]
  • Multi-use Trail - Hydro corridors (see above). Bayview re-paving trails.
  • State of Good Repair survey - we may see something come of this in the near future
  • Some roads repaired, including Harbord and Davenport.
  • Spadina - edge marking scrubbed but new on-street marking designed for cyclists will be installed in the Spring. [Sounds like they haven't settled on sharrows yet - what's up their sleeves?]
  • Studies: Bicycle Cordon Count
  • Events: Think Bike Workshops, Bike Awards, Coldest Day of the Year Ride, Bike Month
  • And some other stuff - look it up on the link yourself.