The matter of streetcar track and cycling will be considered by the Public Works Committee on November 14, 2012. How much coverage this will receive, considering that the first item on the agenda is the proposed ban of plastic bags, remains to be seen.
The report, in brief, says that streetcar tracks have been around for a century and the problem is how to improve cyclist safety. Removal or covering over of tracks would be done only for inactive parts of the system.
Most of the inactive track is listed for removal as part of planned road paving jobs in the next decade. The City’s report includes:
- 2013:
- Neville Loop tail track: A fragment of this long-disconnected track is still visible south of Queen. On an historic note, this street was the last place to have track set in wooden block paving, but that’s long gone.
- Richmond Street eastbound track from east of Yonge to York (*)
- York Street southbound track from Queen to Wellington (*)
- 2014:
- Wellington Street eastbound track from York to Church (*)
- 2019:
- Adelaide Street both ways from Charlotte to Victoria
- Not yet in capital program:
- Wychwood from St. Clair to south end of Wychwood Yard
- Kipling Loop tail track
- (*) The TTC capital program includes reconstruction of the track in these streets’ one-way direction
This list is incomplete because it does not mention:
- Church northbound from Wellington to south of King (obsolete due to no access from Wellington)
- Victoria northbound from Adelaide to Richmond (obsolete due to no access from Adelaide)
- Bingham Loop tail track (Kingston Road at Victoria Park): This may be removed as part of the TTC’s Kingston Road project in 2013, but it is not clear from the TTC capital budget exactly which special work at Bingham Loop is to be removed.
It is now clear that the TTC does not intend to retain the eastbound track on Adelaide Street which has been unusable due to various construction projects for years, and which is in very bad repair thanks to many pavement heaves, asphalt patches and utility cuts. I cannot help wondering why the TTC has included replacement of the overhead poles for this street in its ongoing program. Possibly they never got around to deciding until the cycling issue came up, or the electrical planners didn’t know what the track folks had in mind.
Adelaide has been out of service for so long that one could hardly claim that the TTC is losing flexibility because they have done without it for over a decade. In any event, there are many years before the scheduled removal, and if a case can be made for reactivating the track, it will still be around, albeit in appalling condition, for a while.
As for the cyclists, the report is basically saying “be careful”, and the issue is now one of finding ways to make the roads safer for cycling without removing active streetcar lines.
Steve Munro 
Robert Wightman says:
As a Can-Bike instructor (1991 to 2001) I taught both beginner and advance courses — “vehicular-style” left were one of the many skills we taught and expected students to master to pass the course (successful completion of the advanced course is required to become a Can-Bike instructor). I know from personal experience that making a left turn in the same manor as one would in a car can be done safely. In general the principle we taught was “right most lane that serves your destination”, so if there was an intersection where there was more than one lane for turning left, the right most lane was the correct choice. Obviously if one feels they do not have the skills or confidence for a particular traffic situation, dismounting and walking is always an option and even I have resorted to that in some instances. However most times I prefer to turn from the centre lane or right-most left-turn lane. My regular commuter route takes me along streets with streetcar routes (most notably Gerrard) and in some instances where the curb lane is blocked, I have had to move out to the centre lane, riding between the tracks (not a manoeuvre for the faint of heart).
I do have to wonder why the issue of streetcar tracks and cyclists have suddenly become a big issue, other that the recent fatality, I can only speculate (a huge jump in the number of cyclists downtown?, Bixi bikes now ubiquitous?).
Phil
Steve: There has definitely been a huge jump in the number of cyclists, some of whom actually know how to behave properly around cars, and to me more importantly, around pedestrians. I am nearly run down every few months, and I’m actually watching where I am going. If I weren’t, “nearly” would not be the operative word. There is an arrogance among some cyclists that spoils things for the rest, an assumption that it is the rest of the world’s job to get out of their way. This is not unlike the attitude of some motorists. Cut from the same cloth more than they like to admit, I think.
LikeLike
Phil Piltch says:
I have seen 3 problems with this:
1. The right hand of 2 left turn lanes is often the one used by trucks and most of them turn to the far right side of the road. While cyclists in front of trucks have the right of way, the left turn cycle is often short and vehicles tend to speed around the intersection often not seeing the bike.
2. Cars travelling the opposite way often make a right turn with out slowing down let alone stopping.
3. If the bike is back in the queue they often get to the intersection just as the light is turning green for the through traffic. Three lanes is a long way to go when the oncoming traffic has a green.
For these reasons I would never attempt to make a left turn on a bike in North America from the “correct” lane. You may have the experience to be able to do it but I have seen too many who wobble their way through the turn and trust on the cycling gods to protect them. Motorists have trouble seeing motorcycles that are larger and have headlights on. I am reminded of a public service ad put out by CN a few years ago that only lasted about 2 days before it was yanked because of public reaction. In it a pickup truck races along side a freight train then makes a right hand turn across the tracks in front of it. Needless to say the train hit the truck and took it about a mile down the track. The engineer climbed down from the locomotive, walked up to the truck and said “In case of a tie I win.” Alas I am afraid this is what will happen to too many cyclists.
Like Steve I have nearly been hit 3 times in the recent past by bikes. Once while getting off a street car and twice while crossing a street on a green light by cyclists who ran the red assuming that the highway traffic act does not apply to pedal powered vehicles. If you want more respect for cyclists, you need get the yahoos off the road.
Steve: I am often annoyed by the cycling and pedestrian blitzes put on by the Toronto cops which target the easy hits. We need the equivalent of radar traps at locations such as T intersections where traffic lights are generally ignored, and where flaunting the law is a serious public danger.
LikeLike
Why weren’t grooved rails (which reduces the flangeway width) mentioned? The less-viable option of flangeway fillers were discussed.
Steve: Grooved rail is more expensive than tee rail and was discontinued decades ago. (It is also harder to get from steel mills because of low demand.) Given that it would take 25 years or more, starting today, for the TTC to cycle (pardon the pun) through all of its track, and that the lightly used pieces such as McCaul could be around for 40 years, I think this is not a “solution” that will produce an immediate change.
LikeLike
Karl Junkin wrote:
Kevin’s comment:
Someone seems to have forgotten to tell that to these people.
Or to these people. Note the mother carrying her baby on the bike around the 45 second mark. She has her baby behind a plastic shield on the handlebars to protect baby’s face from the winter wind.
These people have had a whopping 45 cm of snow. No problem for cycling.
Steve: The distinction is not for the continued ability to cycle within the central city for comparatively short distances. The problem is that the likelihood someone will try to commute by cycle declines the longer the trip, and bad weather adds a disincentive. The same factors affect car commuting. It is simply not credible that enough travel will shift to cycling to avoid severe congestion on the subway.
All that said, there is still an argument for recognizing cycling as an important part of travel in the city. Just don’t overstate its possible benefits in making a serious dent in transit demand.
LikeLike
Steve ponders,
Of course, the last really good close call I had while riding my bicycle was when a transit user stepped off the curb, into the bike lane where I was riding at over 30 km/h. just beyond an intersection where I had the green light, to stroll across to the safety island to wait for a streetcar.
So I guess I could go on about the arrogance of some pedestrians that spoils it for the rest.
Steve: Yes, there are bad apples among all of us, but we pedestrians know that we are the lowest hanging fruit when it comes to easy roadkill.
LikeLike
Robert Wightman said:
It’s my view that cycling and motoring skills and attitudes here in Canada and the US are generally poor and often wonder how it is more people are not maimed or killed in traffic crashes and collision. I would never expect or recommend to other cyclist making vehicular-style left turns unless I was confident that their bike-handling and road-handling skills were good-to-excellent. I am still a strong supporter of the views espoused by John Forester of which Can-Bike is based and largely emulates, but it sometimes seems pointless to convince people that such skills or skills trains are useful.
When I was in the Netherlands and in France I could not help but notice the attitudes as well as skill level of both cyclists and motorists were much better than here. The video of cyclist in Utrecht were very similar to what I saw when I was there and in Amsterdam (though they were quick with the bell with pedestrians that wandered into bike paths.) In France I found motorists generally very careful and respectful of cyclists, unlike here in Ontario where cyclists are (in some case rightfully) seems as at best an annoying nuisances. On a few occasions as I was slowly climbing a winding road, motorists would patiently stay behind until they saw it was clearly safe to pass.
I too have had close calls both on foot and on bike with other cyclists (and motorists I might add). I see too often cyclists (more than motorist) riding past open streetcar doors while passengers are still getting on or off (I’ve often wondered if the new streetcars should have an arm with a stop sign that swings out (as with school buses) when any of the doors is open). Yes, T-intersections places where many cyclists routinely blow through red lights — I’m sure if Toronto Police Service were in need of easy cash, all they have to do is station a few constables at the south side of Bloor at Bedford.
Phil
LikeLike
My theory on cyclists is that no one in their right mind would cycle on many of the major streets downtown.
And the disproportionate number of near misses I have with cyclists while crossing on green pedestrian symbols and even when walking on the sidewalk does bear out that demographic.
Presumably if cycling would become more accepted, safe, and common-place, the demographic would normalize more, and the number of crazy bike drivers wouldn’t seem any greater than the crazy car drivers, or crazy pedestrians.
LikeLike
Nfitz’s theory is an interesting one, because I’ve found that the real risk to me as a pedestrian from some cyclists isn’t from how many laws they break but from how unpredictable they are.
I can usually predict what a car might do next, even if it’s illegal. (It just takes a little awareness and eye contact.) And while it’s the same with sane and respectful cyclists, there are enough crazy and unpredictable cyclists in Toronto to make me legitimately afraid of what they’ll do next.
For example, when a cyclist approaches a red light with pedestrians in the crosswalk, I have no idea if they’ll stop, pull a sharp left to ride within the crosswalk, turn right and jump onto the sidewalk, blast straight through the intersection, or slow down but continue through. I’ve actually been hit by a bike doing the latter; apparently he thought I’d make room for him to cut across the crosswalk, while I assumed given his slow speed he was going to stop as required by law, common sense, and common courtesy.
LikeLike
Phil Piltch said:
This is certainly my observation as well when I’m out biking. One of the most disturbing things I’ve noticed is just how unaware the public is of hand signals. Quite often I’ve had people assume I was waving hello when I was indicating that I was stopping.
LikeLike
Nick L. wrote “One of the most disturbing things I’ve noticed is just how unaware the public is of hand signals. Quite often I’ve had people assume I was waving hello when I was indicating that I was stopping.”
I’d bet that the hand-signs questions on the driving test is often answered wrongly. Part of the problem is that you only need 80% to pass the written test.
Why shouldn’t it be 100%? Who wants to be hit by the driver that thinks that you don’t need to yield to a pedestrian?
There seems to be a general assumption that everyone should be able to be licensed to drive. Perhaps the bar is too low.
Steve: Politically, there is an imperative to pass as many people as possible and this is unlikely to change. This is complicated by the outsourcing of driving tests to private agencies. If you fail here, try one down the street, or out in the countryside. An agency with a reputation for tough testing will quickly learn that this affects business, while one where passing’s a breeze will thrive.
The presumption seems to be that most new drivers will do ok and learn as they go, as opposed to driving without a license. I’m not sure which is worse.
LikeLike
I hope you don’t mind a personal question here. Are you a cyclist?
One thing I once read about cycling aroud streetcar or light rail tracks is that you should always cross them at a right angle whenever you’re on a bike or you’ll end up on your ear.
Steve: No, I am a pedestrian, and I get rather annoyed with the sanctimonious tone taken by some members of the cycling lobby who forget that they are not the only non-automotive users of the road.
LikeLike