Friday's headlines - Spacing Toronto

One comment

As a daily user of Sherbourne bike lane, I am very disappointed with the proposed design. It sacrificed the parking lane (which will for sure infuriate driver and once again evoke the “war on car” rhetoric and which probably will kill the plan in the end), at the same time the proposed separation won’t really protect cyclists, and it certainly won’t stop driver from parking his car in the lane. The only one thing it will achieve it to make it much harder and dangerous for the cyclists to exit the lane when it is blocked. Pure stupidity!

The way I see it, there is 3.4m width for the two existing bike lanes combined. Put them together on the side where the parking lane is, reduce its width by 50cm, that is 2.9m wide, plenty for a bi-directional bikelane. Then use the 50cm to setup a high enough barrier between it and the parking lane so that the parked car cannot just swing its door open and hit the cyclists. Voila! You get fully protected bike lane, preserve the parking lane. The only thing that it does not achieve the the ability to use the lane by emergency vehicles.

My sense is that the bureaucrat is totally disconnected to the reality (not sure even if the guy how designed this was ever on a bike, not to mention if he ever rides down Sherbourne). He is probably looking at a design handbook that says, bike lane needs to be at least 1.6-1.8 wide, ok, multiply that by 2, add separation, hmm, we don’t have enough space, ok, remove parking lane, job done, it is 5 o’clock, time to go home. He or she does not give a crap about the people who are really going to use it, let alone how the design decisions will play out politically.

Now, I am fully in support of the idea of a separate bike lane on Sherbourne, but if the bureaucrats cannot come up with a good plan, just pave the damn road, its bike lane is just fine as it is now.

Yu

13 years ago

As a daily user of Sherbourne bike lane, I am very disappointed with the proposed design. It sacrificed the parking lane (which will for sure infuriate driver and once again evoke the “war on car” rhetoric and which probably will kill the plan in the end), at the same time the proposed separation won’t really protect cyclists, and it certainly won’t stop driver from parking his car in the lane. The only one thing it will achieve it to make it much harder and dangerous for the cyclists to exit the lane when it is blocked. Pure stupidity!

The way I see it, there is 3.4m width for the two existing bike lanes combined. Put them together on the side where the parking lane is, reduce its width by 50cm, that is 2.9m wide, plenty for a bi-directional bikelane. Then use the 50cm to setup a high enough barrier between it and the parking lane so that the parked car cannot just swing its door open and hit the cyclists. Voila! You get fully protected bike lane, preserve the parking lane. The only thing that it does not achieve the the ability to use the lane by emergency vehicles.

My sense is that the bureaucrat is totally disconnected to the reality (not sure even if the guy how designed this was ever on a bike, not to mention if he ever rides down Sherbourne). He is probably looking at a design handbook that says, bike lane needs to be at least 1.6-1.8 wide, ok, multiply that by 2, add separation, hmm, we don’t have enough space, ok, remove parking lane, job done, it is 5 o’clock, time to go home. He or she does not give a crap about the people who are really going to use it, let alone how the design decisions will play out politically.

Now, I am fully in support of the idea of a separate bike lane on Sherbourne, but if the bureaucrats cannot come up with a good plan, just pave the damn road, its bike lane is just fine as it is now.