Maybe not in your circles, but in mine cycling is more often the primary mode of transport then either driving or the TTC.
Jarvis Bike Lanes are Gone!
- Thread starter GameBoy27
- Start date
I live downtown so I am quite familiar with the Jarvis Street bike lanes. As a previous poster pointed out, most of the time the bike lanes were not used, even during rush hour. And yet many times the cyclists would barrel down the sidewalks of Jarvis. It has got to the point that when walking down the sidewalk, I peak over my shoulder like a motorist if I am going to make a turn, so to avoid being run over by some jerk cyclist. Too bad the cops will not enforce the law about riding on sidewalks, but then it is politically incorrect. Wouldn't want to piss off those commies at Now Magazine.
well they can bloody well detour to a safe and smaller street if they value their lives....does this make too much sense for you to fathom that deliberately going after the major car thoroughfares is assinine when the secondary routes would be better for all? Both could have their needs met, but no... you want to bring car drivers to their knees. Not until bikers pay as much taxes and fees as drivers , pal.
But how much wear and tear does a bicycle do ? And if so, then shit, the same can be said of people walking, why should cyclists pay to use the roads yet the walkers pay nothing to use the sidewalks that are paid with taxes ?
A car is different, those do wear out the pavement...much much quicker then a bicycle ever could. A car could jump the curb and mow down a group of walkers, a bicyle would do far less harm. Oh sure sometimes a bad accident does happen but same with walking, people slip and fall and break their hip, even die if they strike their heads-you could even fall and knock another person down as you hit the ground..so I guess you should wear a helmet and have insurance just to walk on the sidewalk.( rolls eyes )
Another problem is that many people just simply don't know how to ride a bicycle. There are varying degrees of skill in bicycle riding. When I was younger and rode a lot (couldn't afford car), I was an excellent bicycle rider. I could do things most of these limp-wristed numbnuts could only dream of.
Seriously though they were a waste. Too small a number of people bike to make it worthwhile. Furthermore, the creation of bike lanes is not going to attract many more bikers. I mean I love bike riding but not in downtown traffic. The only thing between you and the ER or a coffin is a painted line.
Bike lanes in this city, the majority are clearly under-utilized. However, there are actually bike traffic jams along Harbour St, and College Street. I saw them myself, and actually rode along. Lesson learned. I avoid those areas now.
The city should continue with the bike lane program, but into areas were it makes sense. Jarvis made no sense for a bike lane when Sherbourne was right there too. The other reason was the Jarvis bike lane was almost 2 km, and that's it. Most people I think ride from 2 km to 20 km on their bike trip, whether for pleasure or to go to work.
Even thought I know not many people use the bike lanes compared to cars on the road, I think is it so cool have have a bike all for yourself, and the cars beside oneself in traffic. How many drivers would like to be that cyclist instead of stuck in traffic? Would they like to try?
I disagreed when they took out the Pharmarcy bike lane. I must admit, I only saw 1 cyclist ever use that bike lane. Seriously, one. But that route kind of connected the bike path along the power lines in Scarborough to the Taylor Creek ravine. I thought it made sense.
Those bike lanes, are for people like Mayor Ford. He may not be cycling, but he should. What, he weights 400 lbs right? That's why even if they are under-used, this bike infrastructure is for everybody.
What we need to get rid of is that St. Clair street car.
If you had my work/family/recreational schedule, there's no way I could possibly accomplish all my daily tasks on a bicycle. That's great that you can, but you're in the 2% of the population whereby cycling is a viable option.
So true! I came so close to being smoked by a cyclist riding flat out on the sidewalk last weekend. I was waiting for the light to change so I could cross the street when I changed my mind and decided to turn to go into a store. As I turned I saw a cyclist out of the corner of my eye flying don the sidewalk. Had I not seen him in time and taken one more step, I would have been seriously injured. Had he hit me and had I been able to get up, I would have pounded the living shit out of that asshole. It wouldn't have been a pretty site. There's no excuse for riding a bicycle that fast on a crowded sidewalk. Sometimes I just want to clothesline those fuckers.
Preaching to the choir brother! The problem is so many cyclists have never driven a car so they have no idea how to respect the rules of the road. For them there's little consequence or repercussions for their poor behavior, bad decisions or complete incompetence. I've said it so many times, when I ride a bike I have very few issues with other motorists as I obey the rules of the road and use common sense. When I drive my car I'm constantly having to be extra careful to avoid hitting idiot cyclists who are constantly breaking the rules and putting their lives in danger. :frusty:
I hear ya... Like I said, I bet the majority of the people who are upset they're eliminating the Jarvis bike lanes don't even use them. If you do, tell me where you ride to/from on a daily basis and I bet I can find you an alternative route that's just as fast. No surprise that I still haven't heard from anyone on that. Unless you live at Jarvis and Isabella and work at Jarvis and Queen, you have no legitimate reason to complain about the removal of the bike lanes.
Not a lot but without registration or a license it makes it difficult to police them.
Motorists pay large amounts of tax on their vehicle, maintenance, gas, parking fees etc. They're also easily fined should they break the law. Walkers (I think you mean pedestrians) pay for the maintenance of sidewalks through their taxes.
Drama Queen!
Furthermore, I don't think everyone who is for the removal of the Jarvis bike lanes should be considered "anti-bike". There has to be a balance between cars and bikes. I just don't think it makes sense to put bike lanes on Jarvis or University. I can get to any part of the city on my bike using streets with existing bike lanes or by riding on side streets. Yet the extremists, like the ones who laid down in front of the line removal truck on Jarvis the past couple days, would have you think it's the end of the world.
The city builds a better separated bike lane on Sherbourne from Bloor all the way to Queens Quay, 300 meters from Jarvis but that's not good enough for them. Idiots!
Last edited:
How do you put bike lanes on Bay between Queen & Front without reducing car traffic to one lane? You can't make the street any wider. I suppose you could make certain streets one-way, then you'd have room for bike lanes but Mr. poopy pants Adam Vaughan would never approve. Hell, he wants to make Adelaide and Richmond two-way streets.
totally wrong, as usual. Not Jarvis or University. Major transportation thoroughfares should be bike free, secondary road alternatives should get the bike lanes..... but how can we afford them with you shirking your property taxes?
Explain again how a tranport mode that carries on person in 25sq ft should be secondary to the mode that carries one person per 150sqft? Do you really think we have that much road space to waste? On the tax thing, interesting you call negociating the proper price 'shirking', but it suggests skewed thinking there as well. But 'there' is properly in the thread on the topic, as it has nothing to do with equal rights to the roads.
using your logic, perhaps we should only allow Jarvis to be used by fully loaded horse drawn hay wagons .
I also use Jarvis quite often and rarely see cyclist using the bike lanes. If I had to ride a bike along Jarvis, I would be on the sidewalk, rather than mixing it up with cars on Jarvis.
Along Jarvis there are few people on the sidewalks. Maybe they could set it up so pedestrians use the sidewalk on the west side of Jarvis, and bicyclists use the sidewalk on the East side.
Seem dangerous to be riding a bike on the road, especially roads with fast moving traffic, at night in the rain.
Usually drivers complain that cyclists don't obey traffic laws so it's an interesting twist to see you advocating cyclists to defy the HTA by riding on the sidewalk.
The deed's been done, there's nothing left to say.
I've never let the lack of a bike lane stop me from riding on any street, and almost all of the 15 km I commute to and from work is done without bike lanes.
they must be riding somewhere other than the bike lanes because I never see a bike on the Cosburn or Dawes bike lanes...brilliant waste of space!
Would expect that bikes on the sidewalks is a by-law issue, not a HTA issue. If they turned the sidewalk into a multi use path, then it would not be an issue at all.
My feeling is that cyclists mixed between fast moving traffic and parallel parked cars is a dangerous idea. These bike lanes may give some cyclists a false sense of security and entitlement. I would rather not see bike lanes in these areas, and have the cyclist be on the road paying more attention, or on the sidewalk if there are few or no pedestrians. I have never ridden a bike downtown, so could be wrong, maybe it is not a problem.
