Bill 212 – Multi-use paths versus On-Road Bike Lanes

Brampton roads have been significantly overbuilt leading to speeding, aggressive driving, high building and maintenance cost due to the width of the roadway, stormwater management issues, and injuries and deaths among drivers, as well as vulnerable road users.

The key strategy of Brampton’s Active Transportation Master Plan, which was passed unanimously in 2019, was to primarily take advantage of road maintenance and reconstruction projects, to cheaply implement on-road cycling infrastructure, by taking away motor vehicle traffic lanes. This had the benefit of addressing all of the points I made in the previous paragraph. In the last five years, almost 80 km of on-road infrastructure has been implemented in this way, including about 7 km of curb and flexipost protected lanes along Vodden, Howden, and Hanover, forming a much needed east-west cycling corridor.

From 2018 to 2023 the number of Brampton cycling trips have increased 57% to 3.5 million annually. That’s a lot of trips that are not being made in cars. BikeBrampton just recently did a very informative post on this encouraging new data.

Not all of our municipal councillors are supportive of bike lanes, and Bill 212 has emboldened them to stop the construction of a third of the bike lanes planned for 2024, despite the fact that the contractor was already engaged and working on new infrastructure. These councillors, like to claim that they support active transportation while actively blocking projects and refusing to defend them to their constituents. They think bikes belong on multi use paths, in the boulevard, and in the parks. I’m not against these facility types per se, however, in Brampton they are rarely built or maintained to useful standards for anyone except recreational cyclists.

The problem with this viewpoint is that these facility types are not useful for utilitarian cyclists, and for those who need to access amenities along major streets. These facility types are also rarely built to safely, accommodate bi-directional pedestrian, and bi- directional cycling traffic to safely share the space, even at Brampton‘s current active transportation mode share.

Recently, the Region Of Peel rebuilt the multi-use path in the boulevard on Bovaird Drive, from 410-10, to a high quality. It is wide, has pavement markings, and crossrides separated from crosswalks. I have started using this facility rather than riding on the road. With current cycling and walking volumes in Brampton, this path is adequate in warm weather.

Unfortunately, the city chooses to maintain this path with a sidewalk plow, which barely accommodates one direction of walking or cycling. This is despite repeated requests for the full width to be plowed, from myself, and the Active Transportation Advisory Committee, and BikeBrampton. The city also maintains it poorly, and often in an untimely fashion.

In this picture taken at 11 AM today, you can see that the road is bare and dry, but the multi-use path, has only had less than half of it plowed, and it’s done poorly. The green line shows the actual edges of the pavement, and the red line show the ploughed area, which you can see is barely wider than I am. Yet, councillors, and MPPs, who never ride a bike, even in good weather, think they know what’s best, despite our regular attempts to educate them. 

Here’s the eastbound view.

I live 9 km east of this plaza, and generally ride, but because I did not want to risk a fall today on a poorly cleared path, I was forced to drive.

On my way home, I took a picture of this on-street painted bike lane on Peter Robertson. You can see that it has been cleared well, and is dry, like the rest of the roadway. While this facility type, because it isn’t protected, will not attract the “interested but concerned” segment of the population, it is still useful for those who are already riding because they are strong cyclists, or because they must ride for financial reasons. It also calms traffic, and stakes out a portion of the roadway that can be upgraded to higher quality cycling infrastructure in the future. The other thing to note is that it is about the same width as the cleared portion of multi-use path on Bovaird Drive, but has to only accommodate one direction of bike traffic. There is a lane on the other side of the road and sidewalks on both sides here. You can also see there is no congestion. But, because this facility removed motor vehicle traffic lanes along portions of Peter Robertson, the provincial government could force Brampton to remove it. Brampton Council has directed staff not to build on-road facilities like this next year, but to replace them with urban shoulders, which allow parking, despite the fact that most of these facility types are on streets where residents have driveways and garages.

Four years ago, I delegated to council on the danger of urban shoulders versus bike lanes, and the city agreed to stop implementing them. Unfortunately, when you’re a cycling advocate in this city, and this province, you can never be sure that your gains won’t be taken away from you.

When I got home, I took a walk Stephen Llewelyn Trail, which is representative of the type of park facility that many of councillors think cyclists should be forced to use. As you can see from the following pictures even yesterday‘s small first snowfall of the year was cleared poorly, and would be difficult to ride through even for experienced cyclists, and could lead to injuries. Later in the season when we get a buildup of snow, and freeze and thaw cycles, our recreational pathways become even more treacherous, and I personally stick to the road at that time of year.

Just at the top of the hill from this poorly cleared section, I took a picture of Mountainash Road, which you can see is clear and dry.

Winter transportation facility maintenance diverges dramatically between what is done for the roads, versus what is done for the sidewalks, multi-use paths, and recreational trails. When snow is expected, roads are pre-treated with a brine that slows the buildup of snow, and prevents the road from becoming slippery. Salt is also spread, and sometimes grit. Roadways are often plowed more than once per snowfall, depending on the size of the snowfall. In contrast, active transportation facilities receive no pre-treatment, and are only cleared once, when the snowfall has finished. The city refuses to use salt on its recreational trails, siting environmental concerns, yet has no concern about all the salt runoff from the roadways going into the stormwater system that empties into creeks in those same parks. The city also allows itself more time to clear active transportation facilities. 

To conclude, I’m not against these facility types, however, in order for them to be a useful as part of a transportation network, they need to be built to a much higher standard, and maintained to a much higher standard.

Enrico Peñalosa said, that one should look for a city’s values in its budget, not in its vision statements. Brampton makes all the right claims in its vision statement and planning documents, but absolutely fails when budgeting for active transportation.

If provincial and municipal governments, want to maintain the current roadways for motor vehicle traffic, despite the fact that they will then fail to address speeding, aggressive driving, stormwater management, and the safety of all road users, not just vulnerable ones, then they need to look at their Active Transportation budgets, and dramatically increase them, because these types of cycling facilities cost significantly more than on street cycling infrastructure, both to build, and to maintain.