December 13, 1999

Nicole Swerhun

LURA Consulting

67 Mowat Avenue, Suite 446

Toronto, Ontario

M6K 3E3

Re: the Port Lands Public Consultation Process

Dear Nicole,

The Toronto Cycling Committee, an advisory committee of City Council, at its last meeting, approved a motion calling for a working group to contribute to the public consultation process and to submit recommendations to Council, planning staff, and LURA (a consultant facilitating the public consultation process). This communication is in response to that motion.

Cyclists are entrenched stakeholder in the Port Lands.

The Port Lands is probably the area in the city of Toronto most utilized by cyclists . Commuters pour through the area. Sportif riders do circuits on its long uninterrupted streets, recreational and touring cyclists travel thorough the Port Lands on Commissioners Street or the Martin Goodman trail while traveling east-west. On summer weekends the Leslie Street spit is overflowing with recreational cyclists and inline skaters. On nice days the Martin Goodman trail can't be efficiently used by cyclists because of congestion. Roads in the Port Lands area handle the overflow as the street provides a freer flow for cyclists.

The popularity of this area among cyclists stems from its unique characteristics. The Port Lands is on the only east-west cycling route that crosses the city and as such are essential to cycling flow. In addition, it lies at the south end of the Don Valley Trail system and hosts the Leslie Street Spit at its south end. There are very few intersections, stop signs or traffic lights within the Port Lands. In addition the land is flat; ideal conditions for efficient human powered transport. Because of the primarily industrial character of the area, the roads are generally free of traffic in the evenings and on weekends. Thus the Port Lands is heavily used by commuter, recreational and sportif cyclists.

We are concerned that the planners will not make a distinction between preserving the quality of cycling as it now exists and giving simple lip service to cycling. By this we mean that if planners simply designate an ineffective bikeway (for example, a narrow, meandering trail, shared by children, dog walkers, etc.) as a cycling facility, then cyclists and cycling will have suffered an immeasurable diminution of quality. While we do not expect that cycling will be forgotten in any plan the City may conceive, we are very concerned that the existing quality of the cycling experience will be lost. We are trying to convey to you here that the enjoyment of the facilities by cyclists should not be confused with the mere existence of facilities. If the cycling trail is clogged with various other types of users, if the streets become dangerously congested with motor vehicles and the addition of more intersections and pedestrian crossings, then the special qualities now enjoyed in the Port Lands are lost.

PROPOSED ACTION

Developers and planners must recognize and act upon the need for effective cycling facilities in the Port Lands area. Specifically we ask that:

· the existing recreational facility (the Martin Goodman Trail) should be maintained as a functional bikeway. Further development in the area (including recreational facilities) could easily inadvertently hinder the smooth function of the bike path. We suggest planners work with the Toronto Cycling Committee with regard to specific designs and plans.

· the on-street, free flow of cycles east-west should be maintained. This function will be even more important if a substantial redevelopment takes place. Redevelopment will generate a lot of "local" east-west traffic. The addition of a "central" motor-way seemed to have good resonance at the community forums. While this appears to be the best option, it does pose a concern for cycling and pedestrian traffic. Will adequate provisions be made for safe and efficient crossing of this motor-way? We note there appears to be interest in maintaining an active shipping port. In our vision we see an active port being served by a massive transportation system consisting of motor-ways, railways and pipelines. Without careful design this required infrastructure will impede pedestrians and cyclists.

· if existing recreational and commuter uses are diminished we submit that facilities be built to replace them

With regard to building development, we submit that:

· any new commercial or industrial projects include a code requirement that there be showers for employees, secure bike parking out of the weather in a ratio consistent with meaningful use of cycles for transportation to work, such parking to be at modern facilities or cages.

· any new residential project likewise be bike friendly, not hindered by long rooted prejudices against taking bikes through a lobby, or up an elevator etc.

· all business be accessible by bike within the Port Lands area. Given the size of the area, its flat nature, its location on existing cycle facilities, proximity to the downtown core and to the Martin Goodman and Don Valley trails, etc. the Port Lands has the promise to be an area that is highly suitable for cycling. In our vision, if a live, work, play redevelopment were to take place, this area would likely see an explosion of cycle usage, as innumerable local trips would be generated. Will the streetscapes and intersections be designed to accommodate this, or will they be designed in traditional patterns which thwart cycling and pedestrian travel?

In conclusion, at this early point in the process, we can only give generalized comments, but it is our position that the Toronto Cycling Committee should have direct input as the project moves into the design phase.

Sincerely,

Stephen Fisher (co-chair)

On behalf of the Toronto Cycling Committee, Port Lands Working Group.