Okay, so we know that Paris has transformed itself from a car city into a biking city. Between 2015-2020 the City doubled its number of bike lanes. Then in 2021, it announced that it wanted to become a "100% cycling city" and further add to its bike network. Today, it has one of the busiest bike routes in the world and more people cycle than drive. The Globe and Mail reported, here, that last year 11.2% of trips in Paris proper were made by bike, compared to only 4.3% by car. "You would not be wrong to call it a war on the car," Marcus Gee writes. However, the result was a "victory for the city."
At the same time, we know how people will respond to this data. Lots of people will read this article and immediately say, "yeah, but that's Paris, where the average highs and lows in January are 8 and 3 degrees, respectively. It simply won't work in Toronto where our January highs and lows average 0 and -7 degrees. We have snow to contend with; they don't." And of course, they wouldn't be entirely wrong in this argument. Cycling does tend to decline in the winter months in most cities. (Note: The months of April to November in Toronto are just as warm or warmer than Paris in the winter.)
But just for fun, let's look at Oulu, Finland which has been called the "winter cycling capital of the world." Oulu has a population of around 210,000 people, an extremely low population density of approximately 150 people per km2, and January temperatures that average between -7 and -15 degrees. And yet: 40% of residents report cycling on a weekly basis, more than 40% of trips to school are by bike, 22% of all trips in the inner city are by bicycle, and this number remains at 12% throughout the winter. These Oululainens are clearly hardy people.
Here's a video comparing winter vs. summer cycling in Oulu.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't generally cycle in January and February. Partially because it's cold and partially because I don't want road salts all over my business. But the correct framing isn't that it's not possible in a city like Toronto; it's that I'm too soft. That, and we need to invest in the right infrastructure if we want more people to do it.
The divisive debate over bikes lanes in Toronto continues to remind me that we need far better urban data. People and politicians keep touting "evidence-based decisions," but what exactly is that evidence? The high-level figure being thrown around by the anti-cycling side is that only something like 1% of residents use bike lanes. So obviously it only makes sense to focus on the 99% and not give up any space to this small minority group.
But this is highly aggregated data. It also doesn't speak to any of the externalities associated with introducing new bike infrastructure. Looking at 2021 Census data, the number of cyclists was actually around 5% for the old City of Toronto and in some areas it was between 15-20%. However, it's absolutely critical to note that this is only the people who selected cycling as their "primary mode of commuting" when submitting their responses to the last census.
https://twitter.com/donnelly_b/status/1845875114396750004
Today, the government of Ontario announced legislation that, if passed, would require municipalities to receive approval from the province before installing any bike lane that would result in the removal of lanes for traffic. And in order to receive such an approval, municipalities would need to demonstrate that the proposed bike lane(s) won't have a negative impact on vehicle traffic. To be clear, municipalities should still be free to remove lanes for other purposes -- such as on-street parking -- but not for bike lanes.
There's a lot that can and will be said about this announcement. I'm also aware that I have my biases. I'm an urbanist. I live in a walkable neighborhood. And I enjoy biking, a lot -- both to get around and for fun. So I think it's clear that this announcement was designed to appeal to a specific audience: those that drive in from the suburbs and who are deeply frustrated. This is somebody doing something. Never mind that the new Eglinton LRT line isn't open yet and nobody knows when it will actually open, look over here at these annoying cyclists.
The problem with this line of thinking is that it's not going to fix our traffic. The way you make things better in a big global city with lots of demand for road space is to reduce car dependency. This is not a popular thing to say, but it's the reality. And broadly speaking, this is done in two ways. One, you provide great alternatives. And two, you price roads accordingly, through things like congestion charges. Incidentally, this also creates a virtuous cycle, because the latter raises money for the former.
In many ways, we've been getting better at number one. In 2015, Bike Share Toronto recorded 665,000 trips. Since then, ridership has increased every year. In 2023, the network recorded 5.7 million trips. And this year, the number is expected to exceed 6 million. This is not nothing. This is a lot of people riding around on bikes, some of whom may have instead opted to drive or take an Uber. And I think there's no question that this continual increase in ridership is at least partially supported by the fact that we've been creating more bike lanes.
That said, I think it's clear that to continue to move forward as a city we're going to need to start collecting far better urban data. We need to know things like how many cars and bikes are on every street and how fast they're moving. (AI can do this, right? ) This way we can continually optimize for moving the most number of people as efficiently possible. And if it turns out that I'm wrong, and clamping down on bike lanes and having more people drive is the most efficient, I'll of course accept that. Just show me the data.
Okay, so we know that Paris has transformed itself from a car city into a biking city. Between 2015-2020 the City doubled its number of bike lanes. Then in 2021, it announced that it wanted to become a "100% cycling city" and further add to its bike network. Today, it has one of the busiest bike routes in the world and more people cycle than drive. The Globe and Mail reported, here, that last year 11.2% of trips in Paris proper were made by bike, compared to only 4.3% by car. "You would not be wrong to call it a war on the car," Marcus Gee writes. However, the result was a "victory for the city."
At the same time, we know how people will respond to this data. Lots of people will read this article and immediately say, "yeah, but that's Paris, where the average highs and lows in January are 8 and 3 degrees, respectively. It simply won't work in Toronto where our January highs and lows average 0 and -7 degrees. We have snow to contend with; they don't." And of course, they wouldn't be entirely wrong in this argument. Cycling does tend to decline in the winter months in most cities. (Note: The months of April to November in Toronto are just as warm or warmer than Paris in the winter.)
But just for fun, let's look at Oulu, Finland which has been called the "winter cycling capital of the world." Oulu has a population of around 210,000 people, an extremely low population density of approximately 150 people per km2, and January temperatures that average between -7 and -15 degrees. And yet: 40% of residents report cycling on a weekly basis, more than 40% of trips to school are by bike, 22% of all trips in the inner city are by bicycle, and this number remains at 12% throughout the winter. These Oululainens are clearly hardy people.
Here's a video comparing winter vs. summer cycling in Oulu.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't generally cycle in January and February. Partially because it's cold and partially because I don't want road salts all over my business. But the correct framing isn't that it's not possible in a city like Toronto; it's that I'm too soft. That, and we need to invest in the right infrastructure if we want more people to do it.
The divisive debate over bikes lanes in Toronto continues to remind me that we need far better urban data. People and politicians keep touting "evidence-based decisions," but what exactly is that evidence? The high-level figure being thrown around by the anti-cycling side is that only something like 1% of residents use bike lanes. So obviously it only makes sense to focus on the 99% and not give up any space to this small minority group.
But this is highly aggregated data. It also doesn't speak to any of the externalities associated with introducing new bike infrastructure. Looking at 2021 Census data, the number of cyclists was actually around 5% for the old City of Toronto and in some areas it was between 15-20%. However, it's absolutely critical to note that this is only the people who selected cycling as their "primary mode of commuting" when submitting their responses to the last census.
https://twitter.com/donnelly_b/status/1845875114396750004
Today, the government of Ontario announced legislation that, if passed, would require municipalities to receive approval from the province before installing any bike lane that would result in the removal of lanes for traffic. And in order to receive such an approval, municipalities would need to demonstrate that the proposed bike lane(s) won't have a negative impact on vehicle traffic. To be clear, municipalities should still be free to remove lanes for other purposes -- such as on-street parking -- but not for bike lanes.
There's a lot that can and will be said about this announcement. I'm also aware that I have my biases. I'm an urbanist. I live in a walkable neighborhood. And I enjoy biking, a lot -- both to get around and for fun. So I think it's clear that this announcement was designed to appeal to a specific audience: those that drive in from the suburbs and who are deeply frustrated. This is somebody doing something. Never mind that the new Eglinton LRT line isn't open yet and nobody knows when it will actually open, look over here at these annoying cyclists.
The problem with this line of thinking is that it's not going to fix our traffic. The way you make things better in a big global city with lots of demand for road space is to reduce car dependency. This is not a popular thing to say, but it's the reality. And broadly speaking, this is done in two ways. One, you provide great alternatives. And two, you price roads accordingly, through things like congestion charges. Incidentally, this also creates a virtuous cycle, because the latter raises money for the former.
In many ways, we've been getting better at number one. In 2015, Bike Share Toronto recorded 665,000 trips. Since then, ridership has increased every year. In 2023, the network recorded 5.7 million trips. And this year, the number is expected to exceed 6 million. This is not nothing. This is a lot of people riding around on bikes, some of whom may have instead opted to drive or take an Uber. And I think there's no question that this continual increase in ridership is at least partially supported by the fact that we've been creating more bike lanes.
That said, I think it's clear that to continue to move forward as a city we're going to need to start collecting far better urban data. We need to know things like how many cars and bikes are on every street and how fast they're moving. (AI can do this, right? ) This way we can continually optimize for moving the most number of people as efficiently possible. And if it turns out that I'm wrong, and clamping down on bike lanes and having more people drive is the most efficient, I'll of course accept that. Just show me the data.
Meaning, it excludes people who maybe only cycle 1-2 days a week, or who ride for leisure and/or for exercise, or who ride to their French class in the evenings (like me). I would also assume that these numbers have generally grown since 2021 given the overall investments that have been made in biking infrastructure. So overall, this is weak data. It's a few years old. And it excludes many types of users. We need to get more granular.
Like, it's great to see local business owners speaking out about the benefits that they have seen as a result of the Bloor bike lanes, but in the end, this is also anecdotal. We need real-time data, precise modal splits, the throughput of every major street, and much more. Then maybe we'll be able to better optimize around the fact that we are a city divided by built form and by politics. That's the thing about evidence-based decisions, they tend to get stronger with accurate evidence.
Meaning, it excludes people who maybe only cycle 1-2 days a week, or who ride for leisure and/or for exercise, or who ride to their French class in the evenings (like me). I would also assume that these numbers have generally grown since 2021 given the overall investments that have been made in biking infrastructure. So overall, this is weak data. It's a few years old. And it excludes many types of users. We need to get more granular.
Like, it's great to see local business owners speaking out about the benefits that they have seen as a result of the Bloor bike lanes, but in the end, this is also anecdotal. We need real-time data, precise modal splits, the throughput of every major street, and much more. Then maybe we'll be able to better optimize around the fact that we are a city divided by built form and by politics. That's the thing about evidence-based decisions, they tend to get stronger with accurate evidence.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
