I've been accused of "age and gender discrimination" by a self-described "grey-haired guy", John Schubert.

At least I think its me. It certainly seems as if he's referencing a blog post I wrote a few years ago: "Avid cyclists as policy makers are going extinct and they've no one else to blame". I've accused John Schubert and company, of being "avid cyclists" who achieved positions of some influence over cycling infrastructure and were able to impede its progress for decades. Below you can see some of these surviving "avid" cyclists (source), on a trip to critique New York City's cycling infrastructure. The three on left are members of the obscure but semi-powerful National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Bicycle Technical Committee (John Schubert, John Allen and John Ciccarelli, members of NCUTCDBTC, and New York bicycling advocate and planner Steve Faust).

I compared their approach to cycling with that of more recent leaders in cycling infrastructure, including Janette Sadik Khan (former head of NYDOT), Mia Birk (former Portland Bicycle Program Manager and Alta Planning principal) and Dr. Monica Campbell of Toronto Public Health. All my examples happened to be women (this will become important below).

I called the former cycling leaders "avid cyclists" to capture an attitude to cycling which is usually revealed by the specialized cycling clothing, specialized gear, and a focus on training to cycle in any kind of urban traffic. It certainly has its appeal to some people (as it does to me who has been known to have fiddled and repaired many a bike, taught CAN-BIKE to many, and obsessed over bike gear). But it does not appeal to the masses. And the evidence shows how cycling barely survived for decades in car-obsessed North America.

The new leaders do not focus on special clothing, nor gear, nor riding skills akin to training to "run among a herd of elephants". Rather they have focused on making cycling appealing to the masses by making the urban environment more comfortable and safer. As I mentioned in the previous post, "increasingly these policy makers are not the gear heads, "avid" cyclists and the road warriors - the survivors when everyone else stopped cycling. I'll happily put myself in the category of a reforming avid cyclist. Instead the leaders are increasingly women and men who are intensely interested in making cycling (and walking) safer for their families."

But here's what Schubert says in the quote taken up by NYC Bike Snob:

Here’s a story about age and gender discrimination: Some years ago, I participated in a review of some bicycle facilities in New York. We found that one facility, if you obeyed the traffic signals, would only allow an average speed of six mph (and that’s in uncontested traffic conditions). That’s unlikely to generate much compliance with the signals. We found other stuff, good and bad. We reported on it. So a few years after that, I found that some know-it-all had decided we were all irrelevant because we were old white guys. And published a picture of us, comparing it with a picture of Mia Birk of Alta Planning. And said how much greater Mia is, because she’s an attractive younger female, and we weren’t. Birk is known for defending bicycle facilities that cause bicyclists to get crushed underneath turning trucks whose drivers never saw them. (Hint: Google “truck bicycle blind spot” for some important information.) Most of the people saying, “No, don’t build this crap” are old white guys. But our viewpoints should be ignored, because we’re old and white.

For the record no where have I said "Mia is better because she's an attractive younger female". Note that he ignores Sadik Khan who is not young, and also Dr. Campbell (because he has no idea of her age). I have even less respect for Schubert now.

I couldn't care less about the age or gender of these people. Though it is telling of the background and environment in which they grew up. It wouldn't matter who these guys are except that as part of the semi-powerful NCUTCDBTC committee they've helped hinder truly transformative bike facilities in the US. It was only when some leaders who happened to be mostly women (with a range of ages) did an end run around this committee and created their own guide for cities that they helped break the strangle hold.

I am a white-bearded man in his forties. My mother rode her bike everywhere growing up in The Netherlands. I am quite happy that the old ideas are losing their grip and new ones are gaining power. And it doesn't matter if the people who embody those ideas are young, old, of any gender, class, race, culture.

My toddler also thanks the new leaders in safer cycling. Now we must ride off to the playground. (For gearheads: the bike is a Workcycle).

baby on bike


In the ongoing saga in asking for safe, comfortable cycling on downtown's John Street, Trinity-Spadina MPP Han Dong cancelled a planned meeting with constituents, community representatives and cycling advocates on less than a day’s notice and didn't respond to correspondence from Trinity Spadina residents and voters for months.

In his email to the cycling advocates in November of last year, Dong’s Senior Chief of Staff, Ted Lojko replied after a delay: 

After discussing the issue of conducting another Environmental Assessment for John Street which was already conducted in 2014, neither the local city councillor, nor the City of Toronto Planning Department feel there is a need to conduct another Environmental Assessment. Therefore we have cancelled the Meeting with Han Dong. He has no intent to work against the local councillor and feels the previously conducted Environmental Assessment sufficiently addressed local conditions. If the local councillor or City of Toronto Planning staff wish to request an additional Environmental Assessment Han would be happy to discuss this. But until that time, there is no need to discuss the matter further with our office. 

A group of private citizens paid for their own professional traffic bicycle count at the John and Queen intersection last fall which demonstrated there have been material changes to the facts on which that Assessment was based. Their count last year revealed that an average of 65% of all traffic are bicycles. From Brian Iler's February 21 letter to Councillor Cressy, who has also refused to change the plans:

Our study revealed that, in the six morning and evening rush hours,

  • 60.1% of 1013 vehicles southbound are bicycles, and 69.4 % of 867 northbound
  • southbound pedestrians numbered 4168, and northbound, 4459.

In the three midday hours,

  • 45.8%  of 193 vehicles southbound are cyclists, and 30.6% of 205 northbound
  • southbound pedestrians numbered 4634, and northbound 3215.

They sought Dong’s help, as their elected representative, to advocate on their behalves to the Ontario Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Their original request was to simply ask the Minister to decide on an application for reconsideration of the 2012 Environmental Assessment for the John Street Revitalization project. The application was made by well known Queen Street West restauranteur David Stearn in February 2017, relying on their traffic count. The response by Brian Iler, a year-round cyclist whose law office is on John Street, and a member of the group asking for the meeting: “Joe Cressy’s refusal to consider the facts is distressing enough. For our MPP to refuse to even meet with us to consider the facts is just appalling.”

David Stearn lost his original request in a letter from the Minister on November 30. But he has asked the minister to reconsider (pdf). I'm no lawyer, but it appeared that the Minister said that the Act doesn't allow him to reconsider this type of EA, and Stearn is arguing that he indeed does.

The 2012 Assessment assumed that cyclists constituted 2% of the vehicles using John Street which was easily proven at that time to be completely incorrect, and likely fudged. The report even included a graph that was very suspicious where the bike traffic never wavered at any point of day. The City later posted a correction. It boggles the mind.

John Street is the key link between the St. George/Beverly bike lanes and Richmond/Adelaide bike lanes, funnelling cyclists from the north and west into downtown Toronto. Revitalization is planned to expand pedestrian areas, but maintain two lanes of motor vehicle traffic, leaving no room for bicycles. We would likely see similar conditions to the top photo with cyclists stuck behind single passenger cars; prioritizing the few over the many.

John provides a safe, direct crossing over the busy Queen Street. Whereas the City-chosen alternative of Peter provides a still-unplanned, unsafe crossing of Queen requiring cyclists to make an awkward jog over streetcar tracks. Go there in person and observe people on bikes, cars and foot trying to figure out who has the right of way in a constant, awkward dance.

4 downtown resident groups have voiced their support for bicycle lanes on John Street, York Quay Neighbourhood Association, the St Lawrence Neighbourhood Association, the Toronto Island Community Association and the Palmerston Area Residents Association. Sadly, the Minister of Environment has made no response nor decision on the residents' application made last February. And even sadder, City Councillor Joe Cressy, normally a steadfast ally of the cycling community, has refused to reconsider the design in light of the facts revealed by the Fall 2016 or 2011 traffic counts.

The fate of the Bloor bike lanes hang in the balance with a vote at City Council later this month. For the over 6000 people now using it per day they may soon find themselves without any bike lanes—or some weird temporary bike lanes—if suburban politicians or a new business group gets their way. This new business group is bizarrely called the "Annex Business Bike Alliance". Or ABBA, but not nearly as fun as the band. They don't seem to be associated with the Annex BIA; rather they seem to have formed in protest to the Annex BIA working with the City on studying the Bloor bike lanes. They're concerned that the Bloor bike lanes in their current design are having a big negative impact on sales. But instead of getting rid of the bike lanes, they want to change the "design and operating hours".

It's not clear how many Annex businesses decided to join this ad-hoc group. For all we know, this group might be just one guy, Barry Alper, who I presume is the same Barry Alper that is a co-owner of Fresh Restaurants. Yes, the same Fresh restaurant that gives a discount to Cycle Toronto members.

Money, Money Money: group does their own economic impact survey

The City of Toronto is conducting an economic impact survey that is being conducted by the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation and the University of Toronto. The report is coming out shortly in order to be ready for a vote at Council. ABBA, however, decided sight-unseen that it doesn't like the report and decided to conduct their own super scientific online "survey". Despite the fact that the City's survey was agreed upon by the merchants: "Korea Town BIA, the Bloor Annex BIA, and the Metcalf Foundation, in 2015, before data collection began and before the installation of the bike lane."

Here's an example of the kind of leading question they ask:

How has the Bloor Street Bike Lane Project affected my business sales?

Already the bike lanes are damned by this survey once it inserts into the merchant's mind that there can only be one cause for crappy business sales: the bike lanes. But there's no way merchants can pull out this one cause out of all the possible influences on their retails sales: whether it be the rain/snow/sun; general downturn in the local economy; customers with less disposable cash because they're spending it all on $1 million houses; employees who are skimming; or just bad business sense. You don't have to take my word for it. One of the merchants responded to the business sales question with:

Hard to say, still limited sample. Last fall business was great. This has been an unusual year, there's been so much rain which really affects our business. I'd like to see how the bike lanes work over more time.

And we can't ask the merchants to open their books. The Ontario Association of BIAs recommends against collecting retail sales data because of transparency and uniformity issues. TCAT states "the funding partners and the research team agreed that a survey question regarding sales without data to verify it would be insufficient." So the City's research also gathers "estimated customer counts from the merchant surveys, estimated spending and visit frequency from the visitor surveys, and business vacancy counts from a street level scan."

But ABBA doesn't like that approach, saying it's coming "from a group whose opinion on economic impact from these lanes would not seek out the local business’s in a meaningful way". So ABBA crafted survey questions all on their own, and conducted the survey all on their own. Almost as if they wished to engineer an outcome that is favourable to their own preconceived notions of the prime importance of their motoring customers. As one of the merchants asked in their response: "Just curious about the purpose this survey? It's says it's an Economic Impact Study but of the nine questions 4 are about parking." I have exactly the same question.

Knowing Me Knowing You: Suspicious survey responses

We know nothing about ABBA's survey except what we can see from Surveymonkey results. We already know the questions themselves are leading, but what about the parts we can't see and which ABBA failed to tell us about? Are the responses all from actual owners of the stores, or from random employees? Did ABBA coach the responders in any way?

We don't even know for sure that ABBA didn't just add a few more data points themselves to buttress their argument. There is some suspicious activity in the responses. Out of the 63 responses, only 38 come from distinct IP addresses. And there are two time periods, June 29 and July 13 when there are quick successions of responses within 1-2 minutes of each other from the same IP address. It's almost as if someone filled out the survey multiple times themselves in one sitting.

The City really can't take this survey seriously.

Gimme! Gimme! Gimme! More Parking

The reduction in car parking on one side of the street was the biggest change with the bike lanes. I find it really hard to believe, however, that merchants have any clue if this had any effect. The one merchant who gave us the most information in the survey says, parking doesn't really make much difference:

We have never depended on street parking. There's only 2 space in front of our business and it's a total lottery for our customer to get one.

Wouldn't that be true for almost all stores along this strip? All of them have store frontages that are as wide as 1-2 parking spots. How much business can you actually get from 1 or 2 parking spots? Especially when most of your customers are likely coming by subway? According to the same merchant, even the Green P parking lot is rarely full:

There's a giant freakin' Green P in the Annex that was rarely full is still rarely full. Our customers that drive seem to be able to find it. The changes in parking have been insignificant.

"How important is street parking on Bloor Street to my business?"

Zero, not at all. I wanted to set-up business in a neighbourhood close to the subway, walkable and accessible by bike. That's why we came to the Annex. If we wanted parking we'd by out in Mississauga Dundas W and Erin Mills or something like that.

Waterloo: ABBA's final stand

ABBA is demanding of Councillor Cressy, not that the bike lanes be removed, but that they be redesigned and that the "operating hours" be reduced:

We are the Annex Business Bike Alliance who want to encourage and expand cycling in the GTA but do it in a way that does not dramatically impact local independent business’s along Toronto’s main streets. The Bloor and Bike lanes design and operating hours have created a highway that has reduced business activity along the entire strip (Madison to Shaw). Traffic to the area to shop has been reduced as cars do not come and cyclists do not stop and shop.

Where have I heard "bicycle highway" before? Oh yeah, former Councillor Adam Vaughan referring to the Richmond/Adelaide cycle tracks. This seems to be the go-to criticism now; make it seem cars are just soft pillows on wheels meandering at a walking pace and bicycles are monsters ready to eat your children.

Someone didn't give this kid the memo.

Credit: Jared Kolb

The rest of the letter kind of reads like stream of consciousness, with conflicting demands. One the one hand they want the City to "REMOVE BIKE LANES FROM BLOOR ENTIRELY AND FOCUS ON DUPONT AND HARBORD (and/or surrounding side streets) AS A MORE FUNCTIONAL BIKE ROUTE OPTION". But they also "want city council to keep bike lanes on Bloor street but redesign them so that the Annex can flourish and not transform itself into an area where only national chains survive." And these are some of their suggested design changes:


How is this supposed to work for kids biking to school? Do all children live west of their schools? They clearly have not given school kids any thought.

CREATE SEASONAL BIKE LANES (operational from May to September)

May to September?! One of the merchants had even suggested only open the bike lane during the summer months: June to August.

What about people who like to bike in all the other months without snow: March, April, October, November? It's already October and I don't see a hint of snow nor a drop in the number of people biking. But even with snow the City has been plowing the Bloor bike lanes so there's less reason to stop biking. I find it amazing that Canadians think nothing of sending their kids out to play in the snow but can't imagine biking in cold weather.


I've got a better idea. As a pilot project let's remove all car parking on Bloor and let's see if that makes as much of a difference as you assume.

CREATE MORE MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING SPOTS ALONG SIDE STREETS, DIRECTLY NORTH/SOUTH OF BLOOR (free, 1-hr parking on BOTH sides of these sections of the those streets)

Good luck fighting local residents on this proposal.


Sure go ahead. Make sure cyclists don't go over the 50 km per hour speed limit.


This actually sounds like a good idea. I'll take a basket. But you know, it's already a lot easier to stop and shop on Bloor while biking rather than drive and park. Maybe instead you should try to entice with baskets all those car drivers who lost years ago to Costco or Walmart.