Cycling in Canada

[rousseau]

Toronto is in desperate need of several hundred km or more of proper, curb-separated bike lines just to bring it up to a bare modicum of bike-friendliness. The new ones just recently put in on Bloor were years overdue.


New Bloor bike lanes in Toronto must pass ‘rigorous’ tests

The idea that Canadian cities are putting in too many bike lanes is bat-shit crazy.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Toronto is in desperate need of several hundred km or more of proper, curb-separated bike lines just to bring it up to a bare modicum of bike-friendliness. The new ones just recently put in on Bloor were years overdue.


New Bloor bike lanes in Toronto must pass ‘rigorous’ tests

The idea that Canadian cities are putting in too many bike lanes is bat-shit crazy.

Again, go back and read the article.

The problem is every dewy eyed graduate fresh from urban planning school emerges with words "bike lane" implanted from aging lycra-clad profs desperate to demonstrate that they're still vital. As the author points out, there are places where the investment can be warranted, and other places where it makes no economic sense and caters to just a handful of hardcore devotees (such as himself).

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The problem is every dewy eyed graduate fresh from urban planning school emerges with words "bike lane"...

Again, this is literally not a problem. The idea that anywhere in Canada might possibly somehow have too many bike lanes is utter, ridiculous nonsense. The only place that comes close to having anywhere near enough is Montreal (and maybe Vancouver, from what I've seen and heard).

We're nowhere near having substantial bike lane networks that actually make sense and are integral so that you can safely ride to various points in a city. They are still mostly schizophrenic dribs and drabs, starting here and ending there in willy-nilly fashion.

Yes, when done right bike lanes are masterpieces. We need more bike lanes done right. More importantly, we need more bike lanes period.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Again, this is literally not a problem. The idea that anywhere in Canada might possibly somehow have too many bike lanes is utter, ridiculous nonsense. The only place that comes close to having anywhere near enough is Montreal (and maybe Vancouver, from what I've seen and heard).

We're nowhere near having substantial bike lane networks that actually make sense and are integral so that you can safely ride to various points in a city. They are still mostly schizophrenic dribs and drabs, starting here and ending there in willy-nilly fashion.

Yes, when done right bike lanes are masterpieces. We need more bike lanes done right. More importantly, we need more bike lanes period.

In Copenhagen, every street, or 90% at the very least, has a grade-separated bike line separated from traffic by parking. It's amazing. It's tremendous. It's just what 'building a street' means here; it's as uncontroversial as a sidewalk.

It's really, really good, and over half of Copenhageners commute by bike. I didn't realise how used to it I had gotten until I used Bixi in Montreal recently, where streets like Maisonneuve come correct but ones like St-Urbain have lanes that are a matter of mere paint. I might be getting soft but Parc Avenue felt like cycling down the Metropolitan next to commuting here.

This was a specific policy choice, by the way. Until the '80s, Copenhagen was as car-friendly as any conventional capital; Strøget was an artery (and not pedestrianised), and cycling infrastructure was patchy.

1960s Strøget and Nytorv:





Now:





These things are choices. They do not occur just because that's how it is here; people conceived them, argued for them, and pushed them through. It's not a passive thing.

[Mikemike]

If you were at all informed on the issue you might be aware that the lycra crowd aren't actually who bike lanes are designed for, in fact many lycra people don't want them, afraid that using lanes will cramp their style.

I've biked in a few cities, and in general an unused bike lane is a shitty bike lane, one that doesn't go anywhere, offers no protection from traffic and poorly maintained (full of gravel). His stat on how many people prefer cycling, which he uses as an arguement against bike lanes, has 8.7% of people in edmonton preferring bikes- that's like 6x more than the percentage of people who actually do bike commute here. And, as he fails to understand, people's preferred mode of transportation is not independent of actual conditions using that mode where they live. Maybe if we had excellent bike lanes/cycle tracks etc and calmer car traffic we would have 10% biking their commutes and 30% preferring it.

[eemy]

I'm one of those lycra-clad weirdos desperately grasping at my youth and vitality. I love bike lanes in the city (I never ride on multi-use paths, though - they're practically dangerous to run on, let alone cycle on), but they are so often ill-conceived and poorly implemented as to effectively useless.

There is a suburban arterial road near my house (Lackner Blvd in Kitchener, north of Ebydale) that is nowhere close to occupying the full ROW. Over a 2.3 km section heading northbound, the bike lane repeatedly starts and ends so that it is in five separate segments no longer than 500m (all but one are less than 200m long). What is the point? It is actually less safe in this configuration than it is with no lanes at all. What is even more galling is that the paved roadway has plenty of room to accommodate bike lanes the entire length of the road.

The other major problem is that there is often little consideration about how bike infrastructure fits together at a network level so that key corridors might have great bike infrastructure except for a few places where the built environment is downright hostile toward cyclists which effectively negates the benefit of the corridor entirely.

I tend to stick to riding in the country anyway and avoid the traffic.

[Daveography]

This is what bothers me about this (neverending) debate on funding bike infrastructure: We build roads designed to handle peak-hour traffic, but nary a peep about how the other 20 hours of the day could get by with roads half the width. We don't think there's any value in a bike lane that costs a fraction of an interchange at the edge of the city, but rarely question the value of said interchange even if it only directly benefits the few that pass through it.

Yet there are documented benefits to building bike infrastructure: It's a cheap way to help manage traffic, it brings more business to areas they touch, but most importantly they save lives, etc.

That last point should stick, because if you're going to argue over a piddly reinvestment of transportation dollars to help save people's lives, then maybe you need to reexamine your priorities and capability for empathy.

[Acajack]

I am a non-lycra cyclist, and my take on bike paths and lanes is this:

- Any opportunity to get away from traffic hazards, either on a distinct MU path separated by a grassy verge or on a wide shoulder lane (even better is separated by a curb-like barrier as in Montreal) is more than welcome.

[GreaterMontréal]

Montreal will spend $15 million in this year to add 57 kilometres of additional bike lanes to its 733-kilometre-long network and maintain what already exists.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...aths-1.3579266

[rousseau]

I found this sign in Gatineau Park so moving that I had to stop and take a photo of it. Not just 1 m, but 1.5 m? That's awesome. And it really does feel like cycling is more than an afterthought or annoyance in the park. Drivers really do give you a lot of respect. More than I've ever experienced anywhere else, anyway.

Well done, Gatineau.



The ride up to the Champlain Lookout is epic. The reward is a great view followed by a fun downhill where you reach speeds of 70+ km/h.

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

Nice bike!

I've ridden somewhat recently in Mississauga.....it's okay to ride on if you're on bike lanes, but the drivers have such a shitty mentality. Apparently the city council claims they want to build over 700 km of bike lanes in the city in the next 27 years....they're building 9 km right now. In terms of biking and safety, I'd give them a 3.5/10.

Definitely more enjoyable in my experience to have biked in the rural parts of Ontario. A Skyline bike works perfectly for those country roads, whether is be gravel or pavement. When I do go to St. Mary's, which is twice a year usually, I use the LOOP path system in town, which is a long, and varied set of trails which bring you into and out of town. At this time, I'd give the town a 7/10 for biking infrastructure and safety, the drivers are more cautious.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I found this sign in Gatineau Park so moving that I had to stop and take a photo of it. Not just 1 m, but 1.5 m? That's awesome. And it really does feel like cycling is more than an afterthought or annoyance in the park. Drivers really do give you a lot of respect. More than I've ever experienced anywhere else, anyway.

Well done, Gatineau.

I believe 1.5 m is now the law all over Quebec (since last spring?) for roads where the speed limit is higher than 50 km/h. Gatineau Park is the feds, so they're just complying with the provincial rules of the road.

Motorists have to give bikes 1 m of space on roads where the limit is 50 or less.

[rousseau]

Having recently purchased some new wheels (actually 10 years old), the ace-o-meter for my bike has ramped up a notch. From this:

Originally Posted by rousseau

The ride up to the Champlain Lookout is epic. The reward is a great view followed by a fun downhill where you reach speeds of 70+ km/h.

To the Zipp 404 carbon tubular goodness of this:

[jamincan]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Having recently purchased some new wheels (actually 10 years old), the ace-o-meter for my bike has ramped up a notch. From this:



To the Zipp 404 carbon tubular goodness of this:

Genuinely, why tubular? Outside of a team-supported road race or cyclocross, I just can't see a reasonable justification where the downsides don't significantly outweigh the benefits.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by jamincan

Genuinely, why tubular? Outside of a team-supported road race or cyclocross, I just can't see a reasonable justification where the downsides don't significantly outweigh the benefits.

For fun and curiosity. Plus they were the best deal out there for deep section rims, something I've been wanting for a long time purely for aesthetic reasons. For the last few weeks I've been hounding sellers on Pinkbike and Kijiji with lowball offers, and this pair came through. There aren't as many deep section clincher rims out there, and the ones that were for sale were prohibitively expensive (i.e. well into the 4 figures).

I also admit to being influenced by particular posters on cycling forums whose opinions I've come to respect. They claim that tubulars ride more nicely, handle better, suffer fewer punctures and are safer when they puncture at speed. Yes, the gluing is a hassle, but as an avid enthusiast, I'm willing to try my hand at it.

(For the second time, actually. Many years ago I got a cheap pair of very old tubulars, and I never got the hang of it. So I want to master a skill I once failed at.)

[kool maudit]

Lovely celeste Bianchi, rousseau. Such a classic aesthetic.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

1960s Strøget and Nytorv:

I know it's the "before" when cycling infrastructure wasn't good, but this photo could be one in a series attached to an article entitled "Why Morrissey says he can't watch movies made after 1970."

Or it could be the visual proof that Denmark is the Italy of Scandinavia, as you've suggested before.

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Lovely celeste Bianchi, rousseau. Such a classic aesthetic.

Thanks! Italy is everything when it comes to bikes, I believe. Only the pedals, tires and bar tape on this machine aren't Italian. It's not really that old a ride, though: the frame and components are from about fifteen years ago. I think I've worked out the formula that aesthetics plays in my enjoyment of the ride. It's right around 50%.

I like looking at it. I like getting on it. And I'm not above admitting that I like the compliments I get from other cyclists in the know. Though even the uninitiated understand that the colour is unique.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Thanks! Italy is everything when it comes to bikes, I believe. Only the pedals, tires and bar tape on this machine aren't Italian. It's not really that old a ride, though: the frame and components are from about fifteen years ago. I think I've worked out the formula that aesthetics plays in my enjoyment of the ride. It's right around 50%.

I like looking at it. I like getting on it. And I'm not above admitting that I like the compliments I get from other cyclists in the know. Though even the uninitiated understand that the colour is unique.

Campy is the only way to go. That loud clicky freewheeling!

I ride a steel-framed Italian with Veloce; it's heavy and workmanlike but I like the '1992 Tour' look.

I have put in a lot more miles this year, and borrowed a friend's carbon De Rosa for a club ride a few weeks back. It was night and day. It was so much faster. But it looks like a tennis racket.



I think I need something like you are riding, it's a great balance between modernity and trad cycling aesthetics.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

I have put in a lot more miles this year, and borrowed a friend's carbon De Rosa for a club ride a few weeks back. It was night and day. It was so much faster. But it looks like a tennis racket.

I'm hesitant about newer frames too, but I can't help but like the head tube and the way the fork almost seamlessly meets it.

I'm still torn on front fork shape, though. If you'd never seen a bike before you'd think that curved forks were elegant, wouldn't you? The modern trend of straight forks leading from the head tube at an angle seems like a clumsy homage to Cubist art.

But the hill I'm going to die on is the losing battle against disc brakes on road bikes. They look clunky. I don't care if they supposedly work better, though the ones on my mountain bike squeal like geese more often than not.

Originally Posted by kool maudit

I think I need something like you are riding, it's a great balance between modernity and trad cycling aesthetics.

I put this bike together by trawling the classified ads and UK retailers for deals. Did it part by part, which is a lot of fun if you have the tools, the space and some basic know-how.

[kool maudit]

It might be annoying (I know it's annoying) how I have been favourably comparing my adopted country to my home one on here of late, and believe me, it's not as if everything is better here. At its best, Canada has a vastness and a continental scale that you can just feel, whether you are in the Banff mountains or jostling through King and Bay. Denmark doesn't have that. Neither does Sweden. There is a narrowness to things here.

But Scandinavia does a lot of what Canada does better. It has a lot of what I like about Canada – the livability, the civility, the thoughtful, high-trust public realm – to a greater degree than Canada does.

So I guess what I am saying is that I'll keep doing it.