Subscribe
I have started using Apple Maps when I cycle. I've been using Apple instead Google because it automatically pairs with my watch and tells me (through vibrations) when I need to turn somewhere, but I'm not here to argue that one is better at navigating than the other.
What's great about using either Apple or Google Maps is that it will take you on routes that have bike lanes or, at the very least, routes that have less vehicular traffic.
Toronto's cycling network is far from complete. But I have been impressed by how far I can go on dedicated lanes and by how many lanes/trails exist that I didn't know about. Here is the city's 2024 map showing only dedicated bikeways:
It is not fun riding a bike when you have to fight with city traffic. And so this is a great way to try and avoid that, and not think too much about which routes you should be taking. It's also a great way to test the completeness of your city's biking network.
I'm glad that Toronto is becoming a much better place to ride a bike.
Sidewalk Labs is currently building out a platform called Replica that will support them in their development plans here in Toronto. Replica is:
“a user-friendly modeling tool that uses anonymized mobile location data to give planning agencies a comprehensive portrait of how, when, and why people travel in urban areas.”
Here is a preview of the Replica dashboard showing a section of Main Street in Kansas City. I hope the animated GIF shows up for you.
I have started using Apple Maps when I cycle. I've been using Apple instead Google because it automatically pairs with my watch and tells me (through vibrations) when I need to turn somewhere, but I'm not here to argue that one is better at navigating than the other.
What's great about using either Apple or Google Maps is that it will take you on routes that have bike lanes or, at the very least, routes that have less vehicular traffic.
Toronto's cycling network is far from complete. But I have been impressed by how far I can go on dedicated lanes and by how many lanes/trails exist that I didn't know about. Here is the city's 2024 map showing only dedicated bikeways:
It is not fun riding a bike when you have to fight with city traffic. And so this is a great way to try and avoid that, and not think too much about which routes you should be taking. It's also a great way to test the completeness of your city's biking network.
I'm glad that Toronto is becoming a much better place to ride a bike.
Sidewalk Labs is currently building out a platform called Replica that will support them in their development plans here in Toronto. Replica is:
“a user-friendly modeling tool that uses anonymized mobile location data to give planning agencies a comprehensive portrait of how, when, and why people travel in urban areas.”
Here is a preview of the Replica dashboard showing a section of Main Street in Kansas City. I hope the animated GIF shows up for you.
The platform uses a combination of mobile location data (~5% of the population) and on-the-ground checks, typical stuff like manual traffic counts and transit boardings.
The goal is to understand in real-time who is using a street, as well as how (driving? cycling?) and why (going to work?).
Their introductory blog post obviously stresses the importance of personal privacy, but I am curious how they determine where people are going.
I suppose if they pair journeys with destinations (and the durations at those destinations) they can make reasonable assumptions around the why.
I think the benefits to all of this are clear. But does any or all of this worry you from a privacy standpoint?
The following paragraph is a great way to describe urban cycling and to explain how our built environment can explicitly invite certain behaviors:
“If you want people to drive, build more automobile infrastructure. If you want people to bike, build better bike infrastructure. In San Francisco, as in most US cities, we’ve treated the idea of bike infrastructure as secondary to optimizing traffic flow, and have wound up protecting parked cars with bike lanes instead of the opposite. Because of this our bike lanes are plagued with double-parking. While enforcement is an important piece of the puzzle, we usually fail to admit how inviting a striped space between parked cars and traffic appears to an Uber driver. Our built environment invites a driving behavior that causes cyclists to spend much of their commute pushed into traffic, encouraging a culture of every-man-for-himself cycling behavior, adding to the discouraging perception that bikes are for the young and fearless only. This perception is elevated by the fact that bicycling deaths in San Francisco are hovering at least four times higher than the average rate in Copenhagen, a city with ten times as many cyclists.”
This snippet is from a blog post written by Alex Schuknecht (urban designer with Gehl). In the posts he also contrasts the cycling cultures of San Francisco and Copenhagen – two cities of similar size and density, but with fundamental differences. It’s a good read.
Many of us probably assume that we are agents of our own lives. We decide what we do and when we do it. We’re our own boss. That’s at least how I want to feel.
But the built environment is distinct from the natural environment in that we design it. It is not a given. And the environments we collectively choose to fund and build will ultimately have a significant impact on the way we “choose” to live our lives.
This gets back to the first line of the above quote: build more of this; get more of that. It’s also related to the startup mantra: “you make what you measure.” If all we’re measuring is traffic flow, then that’s the kind of city we will make. And that’s certainly be done.
I don’t think a lot of us think in these terms. But we should.
The platform uses a combination of mobile location data (~5% of the population) and on-the-ground checks, typical stuff like manual traffic counts and transit boardings.
The goal is to understand in real-time who is using a street, as well as how (driving? cycling?) and why (going to work?).
Their introductory blog post obviously stresses the importance of personal privacy, but I am curious how they determine where people are going.
I suppose if they pair journeys with destinations (and the durations at those destinations) they can make reasonable assumptions around the why.
I think the benefits to all of this are clear. But does any or all of this worry you from a privacy standpoint?
The following paragraph is a great way to describe urban cycling and to explain how our built environment can explicitly invite certain behaviors:
“If you want people to drive, build more automobile infrastructure. If you want people to bike, build better bike infrastructure. In San Francisco, as in most US cities, we’ve treated the idea of bike infrastructure as secondary to optimizing traffic flow, and have wound up protecting parked cars with bike lanes instead of the opposite. Because of this our bike lanes are plagued with double-parking. While enforcement is an important piece of the puzzle, we usually fail to admit how inviting a striped space between parked cars and traffic appears to an Uber driver. Our built environment invites a driving behavior that causes cyclists to spend much of their commute pushed into traffic, encouraging a culture of every-man-for-himself cycling behavior, adding to the discouraging perception that bikes are for the young and fearless only. This perception is elevated by the fact that bicycling deaths in San Francisco are hovering at least four times higher than the average rate in Copenhagen, a city with ten times as many cyclists.”
This snippet is from a blog post written by Alex Schuknecht (urban designer with Gehl). In the posts he also contrasts the cycling cultures of San Francisco and Copenhagen – two cities of similar size and density, but with fundamental differences. It’s a good read.
Many of us probably assume that we are agents of our own lives. We decide what we do and when we do it. We’re our own boss. That’s at least how I want to feel.
But the built environment is distinct from the natural environment in that we design it. It is not a given. And the environments we collectively choose to fund and build will ultimately have a significant impact on the way we “choose” to live our lives.
This gets back to the first line of the above quote: build more of this; get more of that. It’s also related to the startup mantra: “you make what you measure.” If all we’re measuring is traffic flow, then that’s the kind of city we will make. And that’s certainly be done.
I don’t think a lot of us think in these terms. But we should.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
