By Sean Dougan
Just when it seemed Toronto had faced every urban issue under the sun—rising antisemitism, homelessness, food banks running dry—a new breed of chaos emerged on October 17, 2024: wild cyclist protests, clogging up city streets. This latest stir was triggered by Premier Doug Ford and his Conservative government’s decision to start dismantling bike lanes in Toronto, Ontario’s economic hub.
Ford argues that eliminating certain bike lanes—especially on high-traffic arteries like Bloor, Yonge, and University—is essential to ease congestion. He claims these lanes worsen gridlock by taking away car lanes, a hindrance he aims to fix to streamline travel times. The removals have begun, and cyclists are far from pleased.
In a bold show of defiance, cyclists are rallying in High Park, parading down Bloor Street, causing confusion and stirring discontent along the way. But why the uproar? Their reasoning is twofold: safety and urban practicality.
Cyclists point to the 2016 Toronto Pilot Project report, which highlighted the safety benefits of dedicated cycling infrastructure. Studies suggest that bike lanes reduce fatalities, a compelling point in an increasingly congested and high-risk city. Advocates argue that bike lanes save lives, prevent sedentarism, and boost downtown commerce by promoting alternative transport, especially in areas where car dependency has its own drawbacks.
Cycling lanes reduce fatalities.
Cycling infrastructure saves lives
As a lifelong Torontonian, I’ve witnessed this city’s evolution and its gridlocks. Lawrence Avenue West was nearly undriveable for a decade, with single-kilometer drives from Dufferin to Allen taking nearly an hour. The city’s infrastructure has long struggled to support anything beyond pedestrian traffic, let alone bicycles. The bike lanes, to me, often seem to add more hassle than relief—crossing bike lanes while parking, dealing with new traffic flows, and handling pick-ups and drop-offs in a way that feels more complex than before.
Here’s the crux of my skepticism: no matter how safe bike lanes make people feel, they can only reduce relative risk. A bike lane won’t protect a cyclist from a 22,000-kg truck whose driver doesn’t see them. We’ve all heard tragic stories—cyclists legally in the right but nonetheless on the losing side against heavy, fast-moving vehicles. A cyclist may have the right-of-way, but they could end up “dead right.”
Cycling protests aim to show the need for safety, yet these same gatherings ironically contribute to the congestion and disruption they argue against. I find it contradictory to claim safety and efficiency based on research, while ignoring the reality of sharing streets with vehicles that dwarf them in weight and speed.
My take? I support Ford’s move to remove bike lanes in certain areas, as it may ease traffic for the majority. However, I acknowledge that cycling is a legitimate pursuit of freedom and fitness that deserves its own space. I propose a different solution: overhead cycling paths, similar to models seen in China. With an estimated cost of around $10 million per kilometer, Toronto could fund an elevated cycling network at approximately $4 billion. This would completely separate cyclists from road traffic, eliminating the risk posed by sharing the streets with vehicles, while preserving a scenic urban element.
This solution is both practical and safe. Cyclists wouldn’t need to worry about fast-moving vehicles, and drivers would benefit from less congestion. If safety is the priority, then a dedicated cycling path is the only way to ensure it fully.
While I respect the passion cyclists show in advocating it is a need for them to live happy lives, I believe the time would be better spent pushing for truly safe infrastructure. An overhead cycling network would be a win-win, a permanent solution to the ongoing debate, and the path to a more harmonious Toronto.