I've got just one complaint:

There are simply not enough cyclists in Toronto.

Now, the complaints in this BlogTO are certainly valid, and the majority of them can result in death. Plain and simple.

Of course, the benefits still continue to outweigh the dangers of cycling in Toronto... I've posted a short list here.

Amen. :)

Don't worry... the songs our choir sing will eventually be learned by more people. :)

Oh, FYI, according to the 2006 census, approx. 20,000 Torontonians listed bicycle as their primary means of getting to work. That's an increase of 32.6% over 2001.

So, I've learned that when you comment on BlogTO and check the little box that says "email me when someone replies to this comment", it doesn't mean that it emails you when someone replies to your comment. It means you get an email EVERY time anyone comments on the post. The 10 Cyclist Complaints post has 102 comments now. :)

Anybody put some time to find a way to get ridership up in Toronto? I think some kind of mentoring program might alleviate getting over the hump that might be there for some people. It's a major time investment and financial investment for some people, and it's easily avoidable. If locals could provide a service of mentoring, then maybe people could "hitch a ride" into bike commuting, or recreational biking, etc. I've helped two guys get into biking, and they approach it completely differently than I do, but they too use the trails, etc.

Your thoughts?

Some of the BlogTO comments are clearly in jest... by people just trying to be funny, or people trying to be trolls.

BeeRich - yeah, that's a constant idea circulating in bike-circles... some kind of mentoring or ride-buddy program. It may be a good idea for us to think about that as BikingToronto is tweaked this winter. :)

Great comment from the BlogTO post:

• From: Mr. Safety

  Bad behaviour is bad behaviour -- be it in a car, on a bike, or on your feet. The problem is enforcement.

  I remember a couple of summers ago the police did a "bike blitz," handing out tickets to naughty cyclists in heavy bike traffic areas of the city. (ie. Queen West, College St.) It definitely forced a friend of mine to rethink his shoddy biking habits after being handed a $200 ticket for blowing a red light. Unfortunately, a week later the "blitz" was over, along with any positive long-term effects.

  We need this approach year-round. Get the cops out at random, not just on the main drags but in the neighbourhoods, where it's like a cyclist's wild west. You blow a red light, you ride on the sidewalk (and you're not a 7 year-old), you ride the wrong way on a one-way... boom, ticket. Then watch as bad cycling becomes a thing of the past and the rah-rah car crowd has nothing to bitch about except being stuck in traffic while bikes cruise by.

  By the way, the whole enforcement argument goes double for these tards still talking on their cells while driving. They're thumbing their noses at the law and they know it.

  Cyclists, remember that when you ride, you represent everyone who bikes. Respect the rules and don't give the haters any more ammo; they've got enough misplaced anger already.

Another good comment from the BlogTO Post:

• Our property taxes pay for road maintenance in the city, not gas taxes.

  Download the breakdown. http://www.toronto.ca/taxes/property_tax/index.htm
  
  5.33% goes to Transportation Services http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/ which includes among other things road maintenance.

I agree completely that that is the reality and that talking about it does, indeed, help improve things.

That said, I don't think it's right - all drivers are not judged by a misbehaving minority of their ranks, all parents painted with the same broad brush after someone sees a dad ignoring his screaming kid at the store. But for some reason, a good percentage of non-cyclists judge *me* based on that drunk guy they saw riding the wrong way through a red light or the person who merged without doing a shoulder check while simultaneously failing to recall the drunk guy that ran down the friend of a friend, and that not 15 minutes before, they had to slam on their brakes as a car shot out of a park space right in front of them.

In other words, I think there are three things to address:

- Cyclists need to be reminded of the fact that there is a bizarre double-standard whereby breaking the law with a small vehicle unlikely to hurt anyone but its operator will be recalled forever as representative of how all cyclists ride and as an example of why they don't deserve their place on the road, while drivers exceeding the posted speed limit by 20 km/hr or rolls through a stop will be considered normal because "well, everyone does that" and the guy who runs the red light in his car will just be some idiot, not all drivers.

- Drivers need to be reminded of (and called on, in my opinion) the fact that cyclists are no more scofflaws as a group than drivers and in fact the consequences of *their* failing to obey the law are much greater. This is not to excuse anyone's bad behaviour (The last thing I want to do is encourage an "Don't worry, everybody does it" sort of outlaw environment on the streets) but is instead to encourage drivers to judge cyclists individually.

- In a longer-term solution infrastructure needs to be improved to discourage law breaking on the part of cyclists. Why do many folks ride the wrong way on some residential one-way streets? Well some because they don't know better (that's an education issue - another point to be covered). But many ride that way because many small residential neighbourhoods are filled with one-way streets that switch direction frequently so that that street won't be used as an automobile thoroughfare, making the streets less safe and bringing noise/pollution to the neighbourhood. These aren't really problems for bikes going through. The alternative to going the wrong way on a residential street is to ride on a much more dangerous, traffic filled arterial without bike lanes. A simple solution to this, that has been implemented in a few places in the city would be the contra-flow bike lane.

- I'm a big fan of the Idaho stop law. Again to keep the residential areas safe from traffic, calming measures are implemented like 4-way stop signs at every intersection. The intent, of course, is to keep traffic moving slowly through the neighbourhood and to encourage many to just use an arterial to bypass the area entirely. The Idaho stop law allows a cyclist to slow down, approach the intersection with caution, and if there are no others at the intersection proceed through. We *don't* need to be traffic-calmed, and given that I have no blind spots, no sound insulation or loud music, I can see and hear approaching traffic well enough that from a safety point, rolling through slowly is no different than a complete stop.

Just my two cents. (looking at how long-winded I was I'm thinking that was more like a nickel, though)

[I edited your link Todd... the youtube URL auto-show feature of the forum was mucking up the formatting a bit. I lost the URL you posted though... so feel free to post the idaho stop youtube video again. Sorry! -Joe]

I have a suggestion about rule #10 the close pass. Don't give vehicles the chance to pass closely. I cycle down the middle of my lane forcing vehicles to pass me in the other lane. I am sick of having motorists not care and clip me with their mirrors. So now I force motorists to wait and pass me safely. If we all rode like this, motorists would grow use to seeing this....

@Annie My experience relating to that seems also to be quite dependent on speed and location. When I'm riding quickly, and downtown I find that I'm given the whole lane - especially if I'm keeping up with the car in front of me. On the other hand, if I'm going relatively slow I don't get that courtesy. And in either case I find my experience to be like yours in the burbs. I used to live in Thorncliffe Park and I found Overlea to be terrible - didn't matter if you took the lane, didn't matter if you were quick or not, you were in the way and folks were only going to get as far out of the lane as they needed to to pass you and then cut you off afterwards to show you how much you inconvenienced them.

@Theurbancountry: I think I know about the reason for their acceleration. Right or wrong when my dad taught me to drive (now this was rural VT, not city streets) he said to give lots of space to the cyclist by moving far to the left (at least he was right here) but also to accelerate to quickly get by them. Many drivers I know are also made really nervous by cyclists because they know what's at stake. But instead of being sensible the motivation is to get out of the stressful situation as quickly as possible by passing quickly. Not really sound logic but I can see where it comes from.

And I'm definitely seeing more of them. 2 years ago I had a client at Dufferin and Steeles and would bike up there. After about Sheppard I would often be the only cyclist I'd see. Now I routinely see bikes there. The Superstore there, where I would never see another bike parked on a lovely spring or summer day now has several bikes in their rack. Sure, many are riding on the sidewalk but in that area, unless you're able to maintain a good 25-30 km/hr and feel comfortable taking the lane, there is no safe space on the road and few if any alternatives but the arterials...

But hey - more people means more need for infrastructure that will eventually have to be addressed (and, indeed, *was* addressed, albeit only for a short distance, on Dufferin just north of Steeles)

Well, cyclists are traffic too... so I wouldn't say "screw", but on roads where there aren't enough room for a car and bike to travel side by side, then "taking the lane" is not only realistic, but it's recommended by police and the Highway Traffic Act.