Here in Atlanta, the city invested in what they call the "Beltline", which is an old rail corridor that circles the city, making a 22 mile mixed use path that will eventually include a tram. The development that it has inspired has created almost a ten-fold return on investment. If you would like to do a video about it, I would be happy to help.
I'd be interested in watching a video about this! As part of the topic, I'd also love to hear what measures (if any) the city is taking to ensure that there are options for affordable living along the beltline even as it becomes a more desireable place to live
@@IndyBikeEnjoyer Atlanta BeltLine has a goal to create and or preserve 5,600 units of affordable housing within the BeltLine TAD (tax allocation district) and, to date, is nearly 60 percent of the way toward this goal. I think that is a requirement per the TAD. I also want to give the city credit for quite a bit of new bike infrastructure as well. There are projects on Juniper and Piedmont in the Midtown corridor as well as 5th street from GA Tech and the 15th St extension. I would also love to see a video on The Beltline and would volunteer some time to make it happen
This demonstrates the danger of “rails to trails” initiatives. When the time comes to actually make it a higher capacity corridor, the people that prefer cycling over transit will fight to keep it a cycle route instead. 😢
@@bradenstromdahl5302 I think he means the planned streetcar line, but this transit component has been planned from the conception on the Beltline and the ROW that has been built out is wide enough to maintain the walkability as well as cycling so it isn't as much of an issue as perhaps cost will be. The COA is in process of building out a streetcar network that will someday connect to the Beltline transit component.
I feel you guys don't address the traffic lights redesigns, that give cyclists a rather lengthy right-of-way, before it allows cars to turn right from St-Denis. While this isn't new (Boyer st had this at certain intersections), it's become a sort of norm on St-Denis and Christophe-Colomb. It is an absolute game-changer in my opinion and is pivotal to REV's success.
They actually could remove some traffic lights in some places. I feel the 3 traffic lights between St-Laurent and St-Denis on the redesigned avenue des Pins is a bit much. Stop signs should suffice now.
@@cieldunord4208I'm referring to St-Denis and Christophe-Colomb, for the most part. Crossing intersections used to be an act of faith. With the new signaling, the anxiety level has been reduced dramatically, albeit not entirely.
@@olivierguinard3350 I use the REV between sauve and Jean-Talon and those light are awful, they just pedestrian crossing for bike. They go at the same time as the car light but not as long so you need to go as fast to chain them and they don't allow you to turn left, for that you need cross then wait for the light to change to cross again. It really hostile architecture disguise as accessibility.
The experience has improved for all users, including drivers. It used to be a stressful drag race from light to light, now it is a drive down an attractive street at slow speeds. I would even consider living on the street. Something I would never have done before because of the traffic.
I'm so glad I gave up the car a few years ago. I just started running the numbers. And as work from home professional, I simply couldn't see the benefit anymore. My total UBER receipts for the month were about $200. But my car payment, insurance and fuel was over $800. To me, saving $7,200 a year wins every time.
Did you compare assuming a "forever" car payment? I think a more fair comparison would include maintenance costs, parking/tolls, etc., plus buy price/payments, *amortized over the full expected ownership period*, and subtract whatever you'd get for trade-in/resale.
@@ratamacue0320I drove for 7-odd years between the ages of 19 and 26, and have been cycling carfree for slightly longer now. Estimating everything that I ever spent on driving (including the $5000 spent on my first car that I totaled 6 months later 🙄, but not including my second car, which I bought with the insurance payout). That comes out to about $3000 per year (adjusting for inflation from the median year I drove, that's more like $4000 in 2024 dollars). I was a pretty strict cheapskate, though, so that's really the bare minimum before you start buying $700 beaters that explode within a year. I never bothered with a gym membership, but I am now getting the health benefits of regular exercise without that expense. That's difficult to price in, but it should be noted, since most people have distinct costs for transport and whatever they do for exercise. (And further mental health benefits from not being stuck in traffic and not living in fear of accidentally killing someone, though I'm a kinda neurotic guy, so maybe that's not as generalizable lol)
Riding a bicycle is a great way to exercise. Ebikes are bringing many older adults back to cycling. Cities need to do more to encourage people to ride bicycles. Safe protected bike lanes and trails are needed so adults and children can ride safely. Speak up for bicycles in your community. Bicycles make life and cities better. Ask your local transportation planner and elected officials to support more protected bike lanes and trails. Children should be riding a bicycle to school and not be driven in a minivan. Be healthier and happier. Ride a bicycle regularly.
E-bikes can also help fill in the gap of suburban sprawl so more people can consider cycling as a mode of transport. I use an e-bike for a lot of my transport and it's great though there aren't a lot of actual bike lanes around here. I'm a confident enough cyclist to handle it and I hope that more people getting into it can pioneer change.
@@ambiarock590 Great point - 20 mph means way less drivers passing than 12 mph. It helps a lot on hills too, that 4 mph crawl yields a lot of time to drivers passing by.
This is one of the things Vancouver needs: a good east west dedicated bike corridor. We just have lots and lots of twisting bike routes on side streets, but zero direct routes that actually go to all the way from East to West/vice versa anywhere near the middle of the city.
Being dutch, i'd say the gold standard, and what i would advise if that corridor gets even busier with bikes, is to move the bikes one street over, and make that a full on bike street, with a nice modal filter in the middle so that the only cars there ever will be residents. and that doesn't mean splinter it up or anything, but all the way down the grid, one street over as a dedicated bike throughfare. you can then even implement bike priority solutions where that throughfare intersects with other roads.
My visits to Montreal are so different than other North American cities. The Bixi-bike lane combo makes getting to different destinations part of the experience. I've seen more parts of the city in a week-long visit than my four years living there.
2:00 I’ve seen people get nitpicky and claim that using parked cars for protection still doesn’t work because “you can get doored by a passenger leaving the car.” I think that’s a horrible argument for two reasons. 1) every car has a driver but not every car has a passenger. So simply putting cyclists on the passenger side drastically reduces risk. 2) you can build in a buffer space so that doors can get opened without going into the bike lane. That’s one good thing I noticed in your shots of this particular bike lane.
If you have the choice between no protection or a parking lane, the parking lane is way better. Like you said, if you build a little buffer area between the parking lane and the bike lane, enough space for the door to swing open and the passenger to be able to step out without entering the bike lane. It would be a good solution. But having a nice green strip with trees, bushes/flowers and grass is the best in my experience. It adds protection, something to enjoy while cycling and the trees protect you from the weather.
Biggest problem I have with car parking between the bike lane and car lane is that people often unload the contents of their car into the bike lane. Strollers, dogs, children, packages, all sitting in the middle of the bike lane as they take their time emptying their vehicle. Frustrating.
I think people are less tuned to checking for bikes on the passenger side, while on some streets opening a drive side door has a risk of another car taking it off so they'll check for a break in traffic to open the door and step out of their car. I think that buffer space for a door zone is really important, regardless of which side of the parked cars the lane is on. Many passenger-side lanes built in the past didn't include it to not take space from car lanes or require a bigger street redesign - only moving a door-zone lane on the drive side to a door-zone lane on the passenger side. The video mentioned the width of the REV lanes, which is also important. With a door-zone lane on the driver side you can at least ride with as much space as possible in the lane and moving cars can go as far left as possible in their lane to give the bikes some extra space. On the passenger side giving space for doors in a narrow lane means riding against the curb with no space to swerve in an emergency. If the lane is wide enough, it's only passing cyclists who are at risk of doors if there isn't a buffer, and that might mean there are enough cyclists that people are also more likely to check that opening the door is safe first. A door buffer is also better for the people getting out of the cars, not feeling like a bike is zipping by them too closely.
@@knarf_on_a_bikeAs a parent of a small child and bicyclist, I just cannot understand why people can't pay more attention when unloading their kids in a bike lane. And yet I see it all the time biking the main corridor in Chicago with several day care facilities along the route.
« Dooring » is usually the number #1 cause of injury and deaths of cyclists in most cyclable countries. It’s not « nitpicking » in any way, it’s a major concern and the best cyclable cities now know how to build infrastructures to remove or greatly reduce that risk. It’s a shame that a newly created infrastructure seems to be unaware of that risk, it shows how poorly the whole thing was thought out. But it’s even more jarring when a channel dedicated to good urbanism describe a dangerous practice as something great. I think the information about the dangers of dooring hasn’t made it to North America yet.
Walking, running, bicycles, escooters, green open spaces, electric buses, electric commuter trains and trams are all parts of a good transportation system. Speak up for improved transportation options in your city. Every train station needs safe, protected places to park and lock bicycles. Children and older adults should be able to ride bicycles to work, school or for fun safely.
As a Dutchy it does my heart so much good to see cycling-as-transport slowly growing a bigger foothold and receiving some infrastructure improvements. Bicycle lanes can carry so many more people an hour than a motor vehicle lane, it's staggering. And this is a long way from a painted gutter, and a protected lane is a great improvement! Not every city can fit seperated lanes into the existing infrastructure OR the city budget. But any improvement is awesome. I hope one day y'all can experience that which I see many people here take for granted.
#3 is so true, but in Utrecht, yes, in the Netherlands, lot's of bikelines are turned into 2-way. City says: A) One route to maintain B) half of the bikes does not need to cross the road. But: most cardrivers are still not used to see a bike coming from the right. Compliments on the system in Montreal!
As much as a 'bike route' is better than no cycling infrastructure, the reality is that as long as you have 'bike routes' but cars can go everywhere, you are prioritizing cars and thus should expect more car traffic than bike traffic. If you treat them as equal you will get a lot more biking. Add bike lanes to almost every road on the island. And don't forget places to park at destinations. You have car parking spots along nearly every street but I didn't the equivalent amount of bike sparking on the same roads.
One of the great things about this channel is optimism standing on the shoulders of borne out reasoning. I've pointed out to my friends that every cyclist they see on those as yet imperfect but present (at least) bike lanes is one less car in their way. Usually that's enough to calm them down. But if someone says Yeah, but man I hate the ones who ignore stop and yield signals and they all do it. Then I ask them, in a collision between a cyclist abusing the right of way and a car, who will suffer the most? It's a manipulative ego boost, I know. But it fawns to their sense of superiority.
This looks great, but at 1:28 it shows how cars have to look behind them to cross the bike lane. I've seen that the Netherlands try to make all intersections with pedestrians or cyclists for cars in front of the car, not to the side. There is some room for improvement there. I was in Montréal last week and was amazed at how good the city is, and loved seeing the bike lanes. We stayed on Saint Denis and loved it (right by the Dickies store). What a great city.
Not super obvious in the video but the green light for cars is actually a "forward only" arrow in that sequence. Most streetlights along the REV are set-up so that the bicycle traffic stops when cars are allowed to turn right. And since there's no "right on red" in Montreal, conflicts are minimized as long as everyone respects the signals (and that's a whole different kettle of fish).
To be fair, building a transit line to nowhere has some merits in terms of guiding city development. Historically, that's actually how much of North America was originally built: Rail lines crossing the continent were built, then parcels of land next to the rail lines were purchased to build towns and cities with ready access to that pre-existing transportation corridor. That idea does, however, need to be followed up with development to take advantage of the line, development that should be at least loosely planned before committing to the idea. A transit line that goes nowhere and never has somewhere built next to it is indeed useless.
Time to fix the link between canal Lachine and Berri. Litterally we are asked to walk by our bike on sections along the railway south of de la Commune, beetween Berri and Saint-Laurent. This is ridiculous. It’s like if instead of an interchange at intersecting freeways, you had traffic lights and asked people to walk by their car
I love your channel, particularly the way you break down complex topics in a way that is easy to understand without losing key details or nuance. But to be honest, there are already a million videos that describe best-practice bike lane design. I feel like a lot of advocates might know what they want to see, but struggle with municipalities, counties, provinces etc. that are unwilling to build it. Maybe you guys could do a video showing how Montreal got to a place politically where building bike lanes like this is possible?
We like to make different types of videos and thought it would be fun to highlight the yearly increases in traffic on the Saint-Denis REV, given that we covered it almost three years ago not long after it opened.
I so need to check out the St. Denis REV one of these days. However, Toronto has been coming a long way in terms of providing long, direct corridors. There is the potential to have two 30 kilometre east-west corridors along Bloor-Danforth-Kingston and Eglinton that are properly protected. North-south corridors still need work.
This video touched on many best practices that many North American cities seem to miss. Creating long direct corridors through many neighborhoods and connecting many destinations makes a big difference. Implementing the changes quickly might also be an important indicator of success. Seeing different classes of bike lanes (ie. painted, protected, separated) is very inspiring. Supportive infrastructure like bike racks and bikeshare only makes the system better. In Dallas, I hope our bike culture continues to improve. Consistent density and destinations seem to be missing here but we can do much better.
Hey guys, just wanted to say thanks for bringing Montreal to my attention. It still has a long way to go to catch up with some European cities, but as someone who is restricted to Canada due to their job I was very pleased to find there was somewhere in Canada that could at least offer a solid urbanist experience. I just moved to Montreal last week (from Fake London) and so far couldn't be happier.
And I think is is yet another collateral benefit of their videos : by bringing the attention to Montréal with their videos, people like you who are more sensitive to good urbanism will be interested in joining the city and eventually advocate for even better urbanism for the city. Thank you for coming to Montréal and I hope you enjoy living here : )
Plastic bollards on a wide-enough bike lane are fine. My town (Ipswich, UK) put up temporary plastic bollards during the Covid lockdown period, but the lane were barely 1m wide; cycling along them, you were constantly anxious about hitting either the kerb or the bollards.
I mean, it's better than nothing, but I'd really prefer something with a bit more permanence and heft. Some nice planters, trees, a row of parked cars, a raised bike path... It might cost a bit more, but as long as not even a fraction of a percentage of total infrastructure spending goes to bike infrastructure, I'm sure we can afford it.
Great way to summarize the success factors, we should all be forwarding this to our local city planners (if they're not already following this fantastic channel).
For a real link East-West in Montreal,the city needs to build a REV on Sherbrooke street ( or the route 138) starting at Le Gardeur Bridge (where there is already a cycling lane) all the way to Victoria Street since at some point in the west island Sherbrooke changes name.
Fantastic video. A related thing to having the bike corridor stay on main streets is that if bike lanes are on side streets, it causes big problems at junctions with larger streets, particularly if there's no traffic light at those streets (meaning you're trying to cross the larger street but you have to wait forever for a gap in traffic, since there's no traffic light). Also, obviously it takes a bit more infrastructure than the more basic elements mentioned in the video, but I love that the REV has separate signals for bikes. So important to get them into the intersection (and thus visible) before drivers attempting a right-hand turn get the green, so everybody can get through the intersection safely.
My city has 1 junction like that. Come off a multiuse trail that bypasses a 5 lane road and to get to the bike lane across the street you need to cross 8 lanes of traffic at the beginning of a highway with no traffic lights. They should really put up at least a on demand light that only changes when somebody walking or biking needs to cross. Its a death trap, not bike or even pedestrian infrastructure the way it is.
Very nice video, any plans on covering the impact of the 3 year pilot project in Quebec that allows ebikes, escooters, e-unicycles and other micro-transport on roads and bike lanes?
@@aeiouaeiou100 Yes, although there's a lot of mismatch: areas that have protected intersections but not bike lanes, and vice versa. It's funny right now but should come together nicely in the future.
2:10 Ahum. This has been the standard in the Netherlands for decades now. We also have about three bicycles per person here/ All in all it's more Dutch. I used to live in a nouse where from house to house across it wents: pavement, bicycle lane, motorised parking, motorised traffic, motorised parking, bicycle lane, pavement. Thank you very much.
In Washington DC., there are bike lanes even better in quality than Montreal’s, but they empty onto 10 lane highways and grass ditches 2km from the lane
This is an inspiring video. I’d also like to see you address how to implement bike lanes so that they don’t interfere with transit on the street, and hopefully allow bus lanes. There’s a facile answer to just remove on street parking but that’s what merchants typically most want to keep. Also, as you’ve shown, properly implemented on street parking can actually protect cyclists.
The parking separated lanes can be done poorly, if they don't have enough buffer space for passenger side doors or adequate daylighting at intersections. If they're just squeezed in to minimize the impact on space available for cars (like a traffic side lane in the door zone also is), they can give a false sense of safety for less experienced cyclists, and even increase the danger for anyone moving faster because they're less visible to drivers behind the parked cars. I had too many close calls with being right-hooked on the Richards Street lane in Vancouver before it was redone. The narrow bike lane also resulted in people walking between the parked cars and sidewalks without looking for oncoming bikes first - the width of the REV looks like it would better cue people to check first before stepping in to the lane.
Imagine just how incredible this would be if Sherbrooke was reworked into a more transit complete street. It's SO wide to the east and west and could easily accommodate fully separate bicycle traffic.
I think a good painted lane is infinitely better than a mediocre seperate lane. I have lived in mtl and Toronto, and the st Denis bike lane is so so much better than the danforth bike lane even when the former is painted and the latter is seperated. It's helped me realize that the main thing that matters is distance from cars, not the type of barrier. A wider bike lane with cars parked outside trumps a thin protected bike lane every time
My city built a GREAT protected bike lane that pretty much meets all the guidelines you mentioned... But you rarely see people using it. I stay away from it and often go a different route even though it adds ~10-15 min to my commute. The biggest issue I see is lack of enforcement with car behavior. There are cars constantly parked in the bike lane (because it's wide enough to fit a car). Not just stopped or delivering things, but just fully parked. Debris doesn't get cleaned up (I always see lots of broken glass, car parts from crashes, and leaves). People's trash bins are left in the bike lane on garbage day. Drivers run red lights or turn on red where they shouldn't. There is no enforcement or care and it deters people from using what would be one of the most well connected bike corridors. I'm hopeful to see other cities succeeding with this and hopefully mine can learn from Montreal ❤
Important to make the bike lane visually distinct from both the parking bays and the footpath. Otherwise, motorists WILL park in it and pedestrians WILL walk in it. Painted bike symbols every 100m isn’t enough it would seem.
Over and above the design of the REV bike lane trunk, your excellent video makes a strong case of a well interconnected bike network, i.e. feeds from other lanes. Did not see much though about multi-modal access to public transit subways, express buses, LRTs and BRTs which are huge challenges out in the outskirts, or suburbian settings with more terrain and distance hurdles. Parking of these bikes become a real issue then (you have all seen these western europe multimodal stations overwhelmed with parked bikes). Anything to be added on the importance of interconnectivity to your public transit system as a factor of success on the REV?
The situation would be further helped if community organizers/planners weren't an obstacle to planning for the building of *vertical* municipal (commercial/private is good to) parking garages. In fact you could even dedicate some space in these facilities for the securement of bicycles including rental bikes. People need to recognize a need for all vehicle types, not just their preferred type...
Guys your voice is so cozy that now I can't stop thinking it will be use in an AI machine that will dominate over human race in 100 years for us to feel safe.
it's also critical to actually maintain bike lanes - getting rid of potholes and cleaning trash. What I also noticed while living in motnreal was that it felt safer (for a big city) to out and walk around. If it's safe to walk around, then it's safe to bike around. Finally, it's important for drivers to realize that it's not gonna be convenient to drive around in a town that's designed for pedestrians and cyclists.
#4 and #5 cannot be understated. Hard to say if convenience is more important than safety, but you definitely need both. If a bike lane/route is one or the other, you're not going to move the needle on modeshare.
I used to be one of those crazy ppl who would bike down St. Denis before the bike lanes.. in the winter. It was one of the best streets for biking north-south in the winter tho, because it was so regularly cleared of snow compared to the smaller streets. I love the improvements, but my only complaint is that now it's so busy with bikes that it can get crowded with slower cyclist. Ah well, I guess that just means they need to invest in even MORE bike infrastructure, [s] what a shame [/s].
More slow cyclists is better than a few fast cyclists. It means you have a good bike infrastructure and people of all ages and abilities are riding. With increased ridership, there is a good case to justify widening the bike lanes.
You have that wrong. It went from 6 lanes for car travel to 2 lanes of car travel, 2 lanes of car parking, and 2 lanes of bicycles - and greatly reduced the speed cars were allowed to travel. If that road is carrying a quarter of the car traffic it used to I'll be surprised. Somehow I doubt the total car+bike trips matches the previous car only trips.
@@TheFarix2723 In terms of maximum throughput yes, but the question is actual throughput. That is, a bicycle lane might be able to carry 80 people per minute at maximum flow rate but if actual use never exceeds 20 people per minute the rest of that maximum capacity is irrelevant.
Interesting video! Although personally I'd much rather ride down a quiet side street than a busy main road. Sure, the quickest route possible would be nice, but less exhaust and noise is very much too. And there's no rule saying you can't have a quiet side streets that runs directly parallel to the busy direct main road, making them both pretty much equally direct.
Main roads offer the most design flexibility. Quiet side streets are often too narrow to build an effective bike corridor unless you're willing to completely remove cars or make the roadway a single car lane in one direction with the possibility of zero car parking. I'm obviously being simplistic but those kinds of proposals starts riots here in California.
Bike lanes are designed to optimise the time to a destination and minimise the risk of accident in a big city... roads with no bike is the opposite ... your comment does not help a city to get better but worst for cyclists to get respected . Be respectful , use bike lanes.
Optimise time to destination within a city; that argument has been used to justify any form of transport, and not only bicycles. The method of transport chosen is as cultural as it is of science or practicality. Any infrastructure can be overcrowded, as we see with car traffic. That has happened also with the bike, as seen in Utrecht. Too many people in too small a space, all with too little time. If the car and bike both don't make relief, what is the next choice?
Quiet side streets are often fairly safe to bike on already, without a need for bike paths. And can become safer with modal filtering to prevent car traffic from going through. Also, whether you can have side streets parallel to the main road depends on how your streets were laid out. Often it's too late to have such streets, because it wasn't developed as a grid. Or you have such streets but they get blocked by odd block shapes every so often.
There's just one major barrier to building bike lanes: any attempt to remove car parking spaces or car lanes will inevitably be met with cries of "WAR ON CARS!!" from angry car-addicted suburbanites, most infamously the evil John Phillips of 790 KABC. You should hold a debate against him!
Considering the cyclists are subsidizing the suburbs AND all the asphalt the car people use and paying way more than their fair share of the overall infrastructure bills compared to usage, I think those people need to sit down and pipe down.
I looked at this and felt safer than what we deal with now. Id rather someone whack me there and I fall onto sidewalk rather than into the path of a car. If I was riding that section I would be right of the lane like you expressed.
Yes it is very unsafe especially because in the exemple cyclists are trapped between a car parking and an elevated pathway. Which means if a car opens a door or cross the line while parking, you don’t even have the option to turn to the side. You’re pretty much screwed in this tiny corridor of death.
I felt it was safer than being knocked under a bus. The lane looks like it was designed to be low cost but effective. I think they succeeded@@ombremad6951
Surely BIXI bike sharing system launching as early as 2009 must be a huge factor in reaching the bike cycling maturity reached by now. Would be fascinating to know more about how the bike cycling network is spreading out (or not?) in your own suburbian sprawl settings, a huge challenge imho.
What do you think of driving on roads together with cars? My city (tel aviv) has a very good and robust system of bike lanes, but I sometimes find myself biking on the road between cars especially on main streets, just because it's very fast, and given the way Street lights and turns work they will probably always be a few seconds faster, at least when the car road is in the middle of the street rather than on the side. I'm sure it's a bit more dangerous than biking on a bike lane, but I find it comfortable and also it has the benefit of making cars far slower on main roads, especially in commercial roads which cars have no business being in. Maybe cities should just give all roads inside a city a 30km speed limit and let cyclists on them, what do you think?
That would not be safe in most North American cities. Though some bicyclists ride with traffic here anyway even when there is a protected bike lane, drivers are not expecting it as they are in Tel Aviv. This is the same with lane filtering or splitting on motorcycles. When drivers are not accustomed to it, they are surprised and even angered, causing an unsafe situation for the cyclist.
@@charlienyc1 then just impose a very strict speed limit on all roads. People talk so much about how you can engineer enviroments to cause people to slow down in critical points, but you can just force them by law to slow down.
@@smorcrux426 Again, great in theory. However, in places where there is little to no traffic enforcement, speed limits (Audi stop signs and red lights) have little meaning.
Edit (The Original list wasn't a priority list): [I would restructure the list at the end with different prioritys] I would give the points on the List the following prioritys: 1. #5 this isnthe Most important one, because without beiing Central through a neighbourhood there is less need for a Bike lane 2. #6 this one should bei the next priorty, If you only have one Bike lane you reach way less Destinations with the protection of a Bike lane 3. #4 this one is my third priority Just because it isnt AS important as #5 & #6 but those with lower prio have less Impact without it 4. #2 wide Bike lanes are the easiest Form of protection, If a Car does Something stupid, you'll have a way better Chance to evade it, and having Them wide isnt realy expansive 5. #3 arent Always possible but are a nice to have at this point 6. #7 its good to dont prioritise this one to much or it'll be used against bikelanes in already build non dense areas 7. #1 this is a Bit Luxus, i dont think it is as usefull as portraied 8. #8 yes but it will come on its one If the Rest is there
The list wasn't ordered according to priority, it was ordered from the details about the lane, then the route, then the network, and then other factors about the urban environment.
One of the problems of St-Denis street cycling path (and all others in Montréal) is that it ends abruptly, and you are basicly thrown back into 4 lanes of car traffic without notice or escape routes. The REV needs improvement. Bellechase is great, but sees less bike traffic compared to Rachel street 2 block down. And Rachel cycling path is a nightmare of potholes.
What do you mean by this? At the north of the island it connects to a bike path into Laval (which, granted, doesn't have as good of a network yet). At the south it connects to Berri. The connection used to be a little substandard (requiring 120 metres of cycling on a painted bike lane on Roy to get to Berri) but around September they extended Saint-Denis with regular concrete separation past Des Pins, around Cherrier, and to the Berri hill.
I am glad bike lines are getting more wider since covid. I dont have car since pandemic, I bought e-bike and happily reach 7000 km.Almost free transportation plus doing my exercises for 6 months at least . I feel more harassment from drivers since more roads from bikers. I just had an argument with driver so I want to ask someone h about the Montreal rules. So I was turning left from Decarie Blvd to Sainte Croix Av, right in front of Starbucks corner. There are lights at the intersection . Should I keep right and than make left turn? I know I am able to make direct left if there is lights on intersection. Please inform me.
I get curious about mode share between bicycling and driving cars on a street. One reason for building a bike lane is to relieve car congestion. But are people actually switching from driving to riding bikes? This might happen with individuals starting their travel career driving, then biking instead. It might be generational, where the children of drivers prefer bicylcling. And it could come about with demographic shifts within a neighbourhood. Or it might be overall trends across a nation. Across North America bicycle mode share has been very consistent from one town to the next, one neighbourhood to the next. As they say, everyone says they want to do their own things but actually do very similar things. How do these trends affect cycling advocacy?
Haven't watched all of it yet, but the first point you make about winter cycling increasing, I'd honestly peg that to the later and later dates of snow we're having in Ottawa/MTL each year as climate change ravages our nation. Ironically, bike lanes could be our saving grace if implemented globally.
If bicycling was the main form of transportation, people will be healthier and medical care costs will decrease substantially. Once the benefit of cycling is fully realized, everyone would use cycling instead of driving.
I'm glad to watch a video focusing on the positive improvements recently made in Montreal and how to apply the experience elsewhere. I just watched Not Just Bikes video about Montreal urbanism and cycling infrastructure and it actually made me angry. Not because it think Montreal is perfect and shouldn't be criticized but because the overall tone was "Well it's not Amsterdam or Dutch, so actually it's shit and don't bother".
He's always driving the point that Amsterdam was shit before and that they managed to improve so I don't think he thinks that for Montreal or anywhere. I didn't get that vibe either.
Go figure, make a bike lane clearly safer than riding on the street and provide direct connections to places people want to go and it becomes a success! In most of North America I'd say that traffic filters and short-cuts stitching together calm side streets is the cheapest way to do this, but I won't say no to protected bike lanes. Madison Wisconsin between the lakes lucked into this development pattern.
I'd add to your list that they are not "shared paths", shared with pedestrians. In Australia, most off-road cycleways such as converted rail corridors, and many road-side cycleways, are "shared paths" shared with pedestrians, skaters, etc and you never know when you're going to come across three or more pedestrians walking side-by-side or a middle-aged Karen doing 50km/h on an e-bike while veering all over the place.
Here in New Orleans the city has been building a bicycle network but it's just totally pathetic compared to Montreal. There are only 3 decent bike corridors: Lafitte Greenway, Norman C Francis Pkwy, and Saint Anthony Street in the outer Gentilly.
I agree that this is one of the best additions to the Montreal bike system. However in the warmer weather St Denis is pedestrian only from Ontario St to St Catherine. Cyclist are supposed to dismount. Unfortunately very few of them do that and most don't even slow down despite very clear signage. It's only a few blocks and there are alternative routes. This reflects poorly on all cyclists.
As a European it look dangerous. Normally the bike line is integrated into the sidewalk, and in crossroads,. there are "speed bumps" to force the car to slow down.
Another point that needs to be said is that the parking protection can't be broken up by Curb cuts every 50 ft. I feel like Planners and advocates are a little blind to that
Interesting to see just how neglected Cotes-de-neiges and NDG are by city Hall. Does anyone know why? Was Sue Montgomery not in with the cool kids around Valerie, as i suspect? Is this going to be rectified in 2027?
There are many places in the United States with good weather all year round that have single family homes connected with a network of stroads. In these places the biggest stumbling block to better bicycle infrastructure is not population density, but attitudes about cycling. Typically, the same people are against increasing population density anyway. These large swaths of land are not practical to avoid by taking a different bicycle route. It makes it hard to get from here to there, literally and figuratively.
Interesting that you peg unidirectional as one of the factors of success. I know it's the current best practice, but I actually prefer what Montreal's bidirectional routes do to the feel of the city, over Toronto's near-exclusive use of unidirectional Bidirectional pools the cyclists in one area, taking up more visible road space and making the lanes look busier than one direction can at a time Bidirectional also effectively legalizes "going the wrong way" for delivery people and makes it easier to turn around
The strategic use of contra-flow bike lanes can be used to address your last point. One of the "guerrilla" bike lanes I am aware of in Edmonton: that stuck around, and is now maintained by the city, was a contra-flow bike lane out of the university area. The area has a bunch of one-way streets to discourage motorists from making short-cuts (by taking a round-about route to get out).
A bike lane should NEVER run parallel with a street, neither a reserved lane nor its own pavement, neither behind not before parking cars. The problem is at the next crossing where cars turn right and bikes are simply too fast, especially e-Bikes and racing and have green light at the same time A much better arrangment is: every second road is only for bikes (and parking of cars if space is plenty) the others only for cars, no bike lanes in parallel, only accesible by bike to reach shops or homes. The crossings with traffic lights or even bridge/tunnel.
That seems needlessly complex and hard to implement compared to just having separate bike signals and right turning signals for cars. Has any large city ever implemented your proposal?
@@OhTheUrbanity Not a complete city, but we do have bike lanes here that route different from streets, behind the buildings on the garden side, and they do well. Silent, no stress, even for people that live there, people walk and bikes go both directions, and at the crossing with streets they have traffic lights, I never heared of any accident. In established cities with rectangular streets this can be implemented by giving every second street to bikes and pedestrians, café on the boardwalk, some parking for residents but for cars a dead end. Only every second street remains for cars.
Here in Montreal, many of the «ruelles» or alley ways behind houses, are used in the way you describe; used as a parallel bike lane for low-speed car traffic, parking and/or bike lane and pedestrian walking area. You can go several blocks on these « ruelles» and avoid using the street or the REV or any other bike infrastructure. Is this similar to the idea that you are trying to describe ? If so, I think that, in many parts of Montreal, this system already exists, but only un-offically, in practice, but not really planned as your system... «every second road is only for bikes (and parking of cars....»).
@@OhTheUrbanity Here in Montreal, many of the «ruelles» or alley ways behind houses, are used in the way you describe; used as a parallel bike lane for low-speed car traffic, parking and/or bike lane and pedestrian walking area. You can go several blocks on these « ruelles» and avoid using the street or the REV or any other bike infrastructure. In many parts of Montreal, this system already exists.....
@@dcb8531 Sounds similar, I tried to look it up on Google Maps, but the ruelles seem short, and mostly dead ends even for pedestrians, we have these ways across the whole town (which is not very large, just 5 blocks) and connected outside into forests or industrial areas.
Bikeshare programs are a system with limited returns, so I am not sure I would include #8 on your list. The issue with bikeshare is that all the bikes people use clutter up certain spots and need to be taken back to other places where they can be picked up. The bigger this program grows, the more 'bike relocation trucks' you'll have driving around your city, and the more common it becomes for people to come across a place with no bikes. As such, bikeshares are a good thing to kick things off, but once you've got success, you'll actually want to remove them as all the time, space and money spent on keeping the system operational is counter-productive.
that's why as the system grows it gets more revenue to higher more trucks and staff and become better to attract other sources of finance like advertisement.
@@OhTheUrbanity I'm afraid I don't have an example of a city that used it to 'kick it off'. I'm pretty sure one exists since I saw it mentioned in either video or an article, but in the meanwhile, the best I can quickly find are references to Amsterdam (narrow streets and bike shares taking up valuable space native bikes could use). The problem with 'getting more trucks and scaling up' is that those trucks will themselves clog up traffic all around the city, which is the problem that using bikes is meant to fix to begin with.
@@Aviertje Do you live in a city that has bike share? In our city, rebalancing trucks are something you see every once in a while, but they don't have a big presence and I don't have any worries about them filling up the streets in the foreseeable future.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Here in Atlanta, the city invested in what they call the "Beltline", which is an old rail corridor that circles the city, making a 22 mile mixed use path that will eventually include a tram. The development that it has inspired has created almost a ten-fold return on investment. If you would like to do a video about it, I would be happy to help.
I'd be interested in watching a video about this! As part of the topic, I'd also love to hear what measures (if any) the city is taking to ensure that there are options for affordable living along the beltline even as it becomes a more desireable place to live
@@IndyBikeEnjoyer Atlanta BeltLine has a goal to create and or preserve 5,600 units of affordable housing within the BeltLine TAD (tax allocation district) and, to date, is nearly 60 percent of the way toward this goal. I think that is a requirement per the TAD. I also want to give the city credit for quite a bit of new bike infrastructure as well. There are projects on Juniper and Piedmont in the Midtown corridor as well as 5th street from GA Tech and the 15th St extension. I would also love to see a video on The Beltline and would volunteer some time to make it happen
This demonstrates the danger of “rails to trails” initiatives. When the time comes to actually make it a higher capacity corridor, the people that prefer cycling over transit will fight to keep it a cycle route instead. 😢
@@StLouis-yu9iz When you say "higher capacity" what are you referring to? Not picking a fight, just curious!
@@bradenstromdahl5302 I think he means the planned streetcar line, but this transit component has been planned from the conception on the Beltline and the ROW that has been built out is wide enough to maintain the walkability as well as cycling so it isn't as much of an issue as perhaps cost will be. The COA is in process of building out a streetcar network that will someday connect to the Beltline transit component.
I feel you guys don't address the traffic lights redesigns, that give cyclists a rather lengthy right-of-way, before it allows cars to turn right from St-Denis. While this isn't new (Boyer st had this at certain intersections), it's become a sort of norm on St-Denis and Christophe-Colomb. It is an absolute game-changer in my opinion and is pivotal to REV's success.
Fair point! That's something we should have mentioned.
They actually could remove some traffic lights in some places. I feel the 3 traffic lights between St-Laurent and St-Denis on the redesigned avenue des Pins is a bit much. Stop signs should suffice now.
@@cieldunord4208I'm referring to St-Denis and Christophe-Colomb, for the most part. Crossing intersections used to be an act of faith. With the new signaling, the anxiety level has been reduced dramatically, albeit not entirely.
@@olivierguinard3350 I use the REV between sauve and Jean-Talon and those light are awful, they just pedestrian crossing for bike. They go at the same time as the car light but not as long so you need to go as fast to chain them and they don't allow you to turn left, for that you need cross then wait for the light to change to cross again. It really hostile architecture disguise as accessibility.
The experience has improved for all users, including drivers. It used to be a stressful drag race from light to light, now it is a drive down an attractive street at slow speeds. I would even consider living on the street. Something I would never have done before because of the traffic.
I'm so glad I gave up the car a few years ago. I just started running the numbers. And as work from home professional, I simply couldn't see the benefit anymore. My total UBER receipts for the month were about $200. But my car payment, insurance and fuel was over $800. To me, saving $7,200 a year wins every time.
Did you compare assuming a "forever" car payment?
I think a more fair comparison would include maintenance costs, parking/tolls, etc., plus buy price/payments, *amortized over the full expected ownership period*, and subtract whatever you'd get for trade-in/resale.
@@ratamacue0320I drove for 7-odd years between the ages of 19 and 26, and have been cycling carfree for slightly longer now. Estimating everything that I ever spent on driving (including the $5000 spent on my first car that I totaled 6 months later 🙄, but not including my second car, which I bought with the insurance payout). That comes out to about $3000 per year (adjusting for inflation from the median year I drove, that's more like $4000 in 2024 dollars). I was a pretty strict cheapskate, though, so that's really the bare minimum before you start buying $700 beaters that explode within a year.
I never bothered with a gym membership, but I am now getting the health benefits of regular exercise without that expense. That's difficult to price in, but it should be noted, since most people have distinct costs for transport and whatever they do for exercise.
(And further mental health benefits from not being stuck in traffic and not living in fear of accidentally killing someone, though I'm a kinda neurotic guy, so maybe that's not as generalizable lol)
Yes I am the same. I delayed fixing my car, and used Uber temporarily. And I am happy with Uber and I never got around to fixing my car yet.
The design itself protecting the cyclists is great. I hope every city in North America tries to implement it. Then I would get a bike again.
That's the way pretty much most of the Netherlands is designed. Can confirm that it's really nice.
I wish, but we all know the evil John Phillips of 790 KABC would freak out.
@@alex2143difference is that the Dutch cycled before the huge system overhaul in the 80’s
They won't.
@@nomadbennot with that attitude
Riding a bicycle is a great way to exercise. Ebikes are bringing many older adults back to cycling.
Cities need to do more to encourage people to ride bicycles. Safe protected bike lanes and trails are needed so adults and children can ride safely. Speak up for bicycles in your community. Bicycles make life and cities better. Ask your local transportation planner and elected officials to support more protected bike lanes and trails. Children should be riding a bicycle to school and not be driven in a minivan. Be healthier and happier. Ride a bicycle regularly.
E-bikes can also help fill in the gap of suburban sprawl so more people can consider cycling as a mode of transport. I use an e-bike for a lot of my transport and it's great though there aren't a lot of actual bike lanes around here. I'm a confident enough cyclist to handle it and I hope that more people getting into it can pioneer change.
@@ambiarock590 Great point - 20 mph means way less drivers passing than 12 mph. It helps a lot on hills too, that 4 mph crawl yields a lot of time to drivers passing by.
Germany that loves paint-only bike lane needs to watch this video.
Still has way more protected bike lanes than mtl
@@kevinthiede1434 Of course, but for a car-centric North American city, it's great and still working on it
This is one of the things Vancouver needs: a good east west dedicated bike corridor. We just have lots and lots of twisting bike routes on side streets, but zero direct routes that actually go to all the way from East to West/vice versa anywhere near the middle of the city.
Being dutch, i'd say the gold standard, and what i would advise if that corridor gets even busier with bikes, is to move the bikes one street over, and make that a full on bike street, with a nice modal filter in the middle so that the only cars there ever will be residents. and that doesn't mean splinter it up or anything, but all the way down the grid, one street over as a dedicated bike throughfare. you can then even implement bike priority solutions where that throughfare intersects with other roads.
My visits to Montreal are so different than other North American cities. The Bixi-bike lane combo makes getting to different destinations part of the experience. I've seen more parts of the city in a week-long visit than my four years living there.
2:00 I’ve seen people get nitpicky and claim that using parked cars for protection still doesn’t work because “you can get doored by a passenger leaving the car.”
I think that’s a horrible argument for two reasons.
1) every car has a driver but not every car has a passenger. So simply putting cyclists on the passenger side drastically reduces risk.
2) you can build in a buffer space so that doors can get opened without going into the bike lane. That’s one good thing I noticed in your shots of this particular bike lane.
If you have the choice between no protection or a parking lane, the parking lane is way better.
Like you said, if you build a little buffer area between the parking lane and the bike lane, enough space for the door to swing open and the passenger to be able to step out without entering the bike lane. It would be a good solution.
But having a nice green strip with trees, bushes/flowers and grass is the best in my experience. It adds protection, something to enjoy while cycling and the trees protect you from the weather.
Biggest problem I have with car parking between the bike lane and car lane is that people often unload the contents of their car into the bike lane. Strollers, dogs, children, packages, all sitting in the middle of the bike lane as they take their time emptying their vehicle. Frustrating.
I think people are less tuned to checking for bikes on the passenger side, while on some streets opening a drive side door has a risk of another car taking it off so they'll check for a break in traffic to open the door and step out of their car.
I think that buffer space for a door zone is really important, regardless of which side of the parked cars the lane is on. Many passenger-side lanes built in the past didn't include it to not take space from car lanes or require a bigger street redesign - only moving a door-zone lane on the drive side to a door-zone lane on the passenger side.
The video mentioned the width of the REV lanes, which is also important. With a door-zone lane on the driver side you can at least ride with as much space as possible in the lane and moving cars can go as far left as possible in their lane to give the bikes some extra space. On the passenger side giving space for doors in a narrow lane means riding against the curb with no space to swerve in an emergency. If the lane is wide enough, it's only passing cyclists who are at risk of doors if there isn't a buffer, and that might mean there are enough cyclists that people are also more likely to check that opening the door is safe first.
A door buffer is also better for the people getting out of the cars, not feeling like a bike is zipping by them too closely.
@@knarf_on_a_bikeAs a parent of a small child and bicyclist, I just cannot understand why people can't pay more attention when unloading their kids in a bike lane. And yet I see it all the time biking the main corridor in Chicago with several day care facilities along the route.
« Dooring » is usually the number #1 cause of injury and deaths of cyclists in most cyclable countries. It’s not « nitpicking » in any way, it’s a major concern and the best cyclable cities now know how to build infrastructures to remove or greatly reduce that risk. It’s a shame that a newly created infrastructure seems to be unaware of that risk, it shows how poorly the whole thing was thought out. But it’s even more jarring when a channel dedicated to good urbanism describe a dangerous practice as something great. I think the information about the dangers of dooring hasn’t made it to North America yet.
Walking, running, bicycles, escooters, green open spaces, electric buses, electric commuter trains and trams are all parts of a good transportation system. Speak up for improved transportation options in your city. Every train station needs safe, protected places to park and lock bicycles. Children and older adults should be able to ride bicycles to work, school or for fun safely.
Thanks for showcasing the REV! It was amazing to have this in my city and wished more had them!! ❤️
Bike lanes for regular commutes, shopping, etc make so much sense.
As a Dutchy it does my heart so much good to see cycling-as-transport slowly growing a bigger foothold and receiving some infrastructure improvements. Bicycle lanes can carry so many more people an hour than a motor vehicle lane, it's staggering. And this is a long way from a painted gutter, and a protected lane is a great improvement! Not every city can fit seperated lanes into the existing infrastructure OR the city budget. But any improvement is awesome. I hope one day y'all can experience that which I see many people here take for granted.
#3 is so true, but in Utrecht, yes, in the Netherlands, lot's of bikelines are turned into 2-way. City says: A) One route to maintain B) half of the bikes does not need to cross the road. But: most cardrivers are still not used to see a bike coming from the right. Compliments on the system in Montreal!
As much as a 'bike route' is better than no cycling infrastructure, the reality is that as long as you have 'bike routes' but cars can go everywhere, you are prioritizing cars and thus should expect more car traffic than bike traffic. If you treat them as equal you will get a lot more biking. Add bike lanes to almost every road on the island. And don't forget places to park at destinations. You have car parking spots along nearly every street but I didn't the equivalent amount of bike sparking on the same roads.
There are some roads with special posts designed to park and lock bikes onto, but yes a lot more is needed.
One of the great things about this channel is optimism standing on the shoulders of borne out reasoning. I've pointed out to my friends that every cyclist they see on those as yet imperfect but present (at least) bike lanes is one less car in their way. Usually that's enough to calm them down. But if someone says Yeah, but man I hate the ones who ignore stop and yield signals and they all do it. Then I ask them, in a collision between a cyclist abusing the right of way and a car, who will suffer the most? It's a manipulative ego boost, I know. But it fawns to their sense of superiority.
This looks great, but at 1:28 it shows how cars have to look behind them to cross the bike lane. I've seen that the Netherlands try to make all intersections with pedestrians or cyclists for cars in front of the car, not to the side. There is some room for improvement there. I was in Montréal last week and was amazed at how good the city is, and loved seeing the bike lanes. We stayed on Saint Denis and loved it (right by the Dickies store). What a great city.
Not super obvious in the video but the green light for cars is actually a "forward only" arrow in that sequence. Most streetlights along the REV are set-up so that the bicycle traffic stops when cars are allowed to turn right. And since there's no "right on red" in Montreal, conflicts are minimized as long as everyone respects the signals (and that's a whole different kettle of fish).
“Imagine if you had subway lines that didn’t connect to anything”
Detroit with the People Mover and Q-line: “yeah. . .imagine. . .😅”
To be fair, building a transit line to nowhere has some merits in terms of guiding city development. Historically, that's actually how much of North America was originally built: Rail lines crossing the continent were built, then parcels of land next to the rail lines were purchased to build towns and cities with ready access to that pre-existing transportation corridor. That idea does, however, need to be followed up with development to take advantage of the line, development that should be at least loosely planned before committing to the idea. A transit line that goes nowhere and never has somewhere built next to it is indeed useless.
Bonjour du Québec! I took the People Mover in 2019; the train was pretty empty but it gave great views of the city! I do hope Detroit will come back.
Thank you for the video, i'm from south shore but gonna try these bike lanes this summer !
Great video as always! Always makes me happy when you guys upload
Time to fix the link between canal Lachine and Berri. Litterally we are asked to walk by our bike on sections along the railway south of de la Commune, beetween Berri and Saint-Laurent. This is ridiculous. It’s like if instead of an interchange at intersecting freeways, you had traffic lights and asked people to walk by their car
You are so right, this place is a disaster.
I love your channel, particularly the way you break down complex topics in a way that is easy to understand without losing key details or nuance. But to be honest, there are already a million videos that describe best-practice bike lane design. I feel like a lot of advocates might know what they want to see, but struggle with municipalities, counties, provinces etc. that are unwilling to build it. Maybe you guys could do a video showing how Montreal got to a place politically where building bike lanes like this is possible?
And as a follow-up, perhaps suggesting ways to replicate that process in other areas (or showing other areas that are working on it and need help)
We like to make different types of videos and thought it would be fun to highlight the yearly increases in traffic on the Saint-Denis REV, given that we covered it almost three years ago not long after it opened.
I so need to check out the St. Denis REV one of these days. However, Toronto has been coming a long way in terms of providing long, direct corridors. There is the potential to have two 30 kilometre east-west corridors along Bloor-Danforth-Kingston and Eglinton that are properly protected. North-south corridors still need work.
Thanks!
Thank you!
This video touched on many best practices that many North American cities seem to miss. Creating long direct corridors through many neighborhoods and connecting many destinations makes a big difference. Implementing the changes quickly might also be an important indicator of success. Seeing different classes of bike lanes (ie. painted, protected, separated) is very inspiring. Supportive infrastructure like bike racks and bikeshare only makes the system better. In Dallas, I hope our bike culture continues to improve. Consistent density and destinations seem to be missing here but we can do much better.
Interesting to point that "rev" is pronounced the same way as the word for "dream" in French (rêve)
I've seen this very often but it's not. It's like saying bitch and beach is pronounced the same.
Seeing the planned bike lane expansion is so exciting, soon so much of the city will be accessible by safe bike routes!
Hey guys, just wanted to say thanks for bringing Montreal to my attention. It still has a long way to go to catch up with some European cities, but as someone who is restricted to Canada due to their job I was very pleased to find there was somewhere in Canada that could at least offer a solid urbanist experience.
I just moved to Montreal last week (from Fake London) and so far couldn't be happier.
And I think is is yet another collateral benefit of their videos : by bringing the attention to Montréal with their videos, people like you who are more sensitive to good urbanism will be interested in joining the city and eventually advocate for even better urbanism for the city. Thank you for coming to Montréal and I hope you enjoy living here : )
That's awesome to hear!
Plastic bollards on a wide-enough bike lane are fine. My town (Ipswich, UK) put up temporary plastic bollards during the Covid lockdown period, but the lane were barely 1m wide; cycling along them, you were constantly anxious about hitting either the kerb or the bollards.
I mean, it's better than nothing, but I'd really prefer something with a bit more permanence and heft. Some nice planters, trees, a row of parked cars, a raised bike path... It might cost a bit more, but as long as not even a fraction of a percentage of total infrastructure spending goes to bike infrastructure, I'm sure we can afford it.
Plastic bollards get chewed up like nothing In NYC. Drivers don’t give a damn about them here. We need more concrete Jersey-style barriers here.
Great way to summarize the success factors, we should all be forwarding this to our local city planners (if they're not already following this fantastic channel).
1 1/2 million trips! Wow! City of Toronto, are you watching?
For a real link East-West in Montreal,the city needs to build a REV on Sherbrooke street ( or the route 138) starting at Le Gardeur Bridge (where there is already a cycling lane) all the way to Victoria Street since at some point in the west island Sherbrooke changes name.
Contact your local elected officials and transportation planners and ask them to support more safe, protected bike lanes and trails.
(Where they make sense, as they point out in the video)
Fantastic video. A related thing to having the bike corridor stay on main streets is that if bike lanes are on side streets, it causes big problems at junctions with larger streets, particularly if there's no traffic light at those streets (meaning you're trying to cross the larger street but you have to wait forever for a gap in traffic, since there's no traffic light). Also, obviously it takes a bit more infrastructure than the more basic elements mentioned in the video, but I love that the REV has separate signals for bikes. So important to get them into the intersection (and thus visible) before drivers attempting a right-hand turn get the green, so everybody can get through the intersection safely.
My city has 1 junction like that. Come off a multiuse trail that bypasses a 5 lane road and to get to the bike lane across the street you need to cross 8 lanes of traffic at the beginning of a highway with no traffic lights. They should really put up at least a on demand light that only changes when somebody walking or biking needs to cross. Its a death trap, not bike or even pedestrian infrastructure the way it is.
Happy New Year, you two!
Happy new year!
Very nice video, any plans on covering the impact of the 3 year pilot project in Quebec that allows ebikes, escooters, e-unicycles and other micro-transport on roads and bike lanes?
One thing I'm missing is the protected intersection design
Agreed. Protected intersections were a really cool feature when we visited the Netherlands this summer. It's too bad they're rare elsewhere.
@@OhTheUrbanity Ottawa does do a lot of them right?
@@aeiouaeiou100 Yes, although there's a lot of mismatch: areas that have protected intersections but not bike lanes, and vice versa. It's funny right now but should come together nicely in the future.
Could you guys make more videos on Montreal housing
Thank you guys! I took notes on this video. ❤❤
2:10 Ahum. This has been the standard in the Netherlands for decades now.
We also have about three bicycles per person here/ All in all it's more Dutch.
I used to live in a nouse where from house to house across it wents: pavement, bicycle lane, motorised parking, motorised traffic, motorised parking, bicycle lane, pavement.
Thank you very much.
They have bikes in the Netherlands? I had no idea.
In Washington DC., there are bike lanes even better in quality than Montreal’s, but they empty onto 10 lane highways and grass ditches 2km from the lane
This is an inspiring video. I’d also like to see you address how to implement bike lanes so that they don’t interfere with transit on the street, and hopefully allow bus lanes. There’s a facile answer to just remove on street parking but that’s what merchants typically most want to keep. Also, as you’ve shown, properly implemented on street parking can actually protect cyclists.
There is a bi-direction bike lane on Bourke St Surry Hills in Sydney Australia. It is very popular and goes for a few kms.
The parking separated lanes can be done poorly, if they don't have enough buffer space for passenger side doors or adequate daylighting at intersections. If they're just squeezed in to minimize the impact on space available for cars (like a traffic side lane in the door zone also is), they can give a false sense of safety for less experienced cyclists, and even increase the danger for anyone moving faster because they're less visible to drivers behind the parked cars.
I had too many close calls with being right-hooked on the Richards Street lane in Vancouver before it was redone. The narrow bike lane also resulted in people walking between the parked cars and sidewalks without looking for oncoming bikes first - the width of the REV looks like it would better cue people to check first before stepping in to the lane.
Imagine just how incredible this would be if Sherbrooke was reworked into a more transit complete street. It's SO wide to the east and west and could easily accommodate fully separate bicycle traffic.
I think a good painted lane is infinitely better than a mediocre seperate lane. I have lived in mtl and Toronto, and the st Denis bike lane is so so much better than the danforth bike lane even when the former is painted and the latter is seperated. It's helped me realize that the main thing that matters is distance from cars, not the type of barrier. A wider bike lane with cars parked outside trumps a thin protected bike lane every time
Trees also help a lot to make the bike lane more appealing
Yes, up until the city neglects to maintain low-hanging branches. One more reason to wear a helmet!
I wish my city would watch your channel
Mine too!
My city built a GREAT protected bike lane that pretty much meets all the guidelines you mentioned... But you rarely see people using it. I stay away from it and often go a different route even though it adds ~10-15 min to my commute. The biggest issue I see is lack of enforcement with car behavior. There are cars constantly parked in the bike lane (because it's wide enough to fit a car). Not just stopped or delivering things, but just fully parked. Debris doesn't get cleaned up (I always see lots of broken glass, car parts from crashes, and leaves). People's trash bins are left in the bike lane on garbage day. Drivers run red lights or turn on red where they shouldn't. There is no enforcement or care and it deters people from using what would be one of the most well connected bike corridors. I'm hopeful to see other cities succeeding with this and hopefully mine can learn from Montreal ❤
What city are you in?
@@OhTheUrbanity Portland Oregon
Important to make the bike lane visually distinct from both the parking bays and the footpath. Otherwise, motorists WILL park in it and pedestrians WILL walk in it. Painted bike symbols every 100m isn’t enough it would seem.
Over and above the design of the REV bike lane trunk, your excellent video makes a strong case of a well interconnected bike network, i.e. feeds from other lanes. Did not see much though about multi-modal access to public transit subways, express buses, LRTs and BRTs which are huge challenges out in the outskirts, or suburbian settings with more terrain and distance hurdles. Parking of these bikes become a real issue then (you have all seen these western europe multimodal stations overwhelmed with parked bikes). Anything to be added on the importance of interconnectivity to your public transit system as a factor of success on the REV?
The situation would be further helped if community organizers/planners weren't an obstacle to planning for the building of *vertical* municipal (commercial/private is good to) parking garages. In fact you could even dedicate some space in these facilities for the securement of bicycles including rental bikes. People need to recognize a need for all vehicle types, not just their preferred type...
They had these buffered bike lanes in a small town in Germany when I went when I was younger, and all the kids used those to get to school.
What are the intersections like? I think those are the most important parts of good bike infrastructure.
Guys your voice is so cozy that now I can't stop thinking it will be use in an AI machine that will dominate over human race in 100 years for us to feel safe.
Note to cities, painting the gutter of a 45mph stroad with bike icons is not "putting in a bike lane"
Great video. As others said only element not addressed is traffic signaling.
it's also critical to actually maintain bike lanes - getting rid of potholes and cleaning trash. What I also noticed while living in motnreal was that it felt safer (for a big city) to out and walk around. If it's safe to walk around, then it's safe to bike around. Finally, it's important for drivers to realize that it's not gonna be convenient to drive around in a town that's designed for pedestrians and cyclists.
I'd say it's even less convenient for cars to drive around in a town that has no meaningful alternative for cars.
This is the way!
#4 and #5 cannot be understated. Hard to say if convenience is more important than safety, but you definitely need both. If a bike lane/route is one or the other, you're not going to move the needle on modeshare.
@CityofOttawa, take note!
I used to be one of those crazy ppl who would bike down St. Denis before the bike lanes.. in the winter. It was one of the best streets for biking north-south in the winter tho, because it was so regularly cleared of snow compared to the smaller streets. I love the improvements, but my only complaint is that now it's so busy with bikes that it can get crowded with slower cyclist. Ah well, I guess that just means they need to invest in even MORE bike infrastructure, [s] what a shame [/s].
More slow cyclists is better than a few fast cyclists. It means you have a good bike infrastructure and people of all ages and abilities are riding. With increased ridership, there is a good case to justify widening the bike lanes.
8:08 2024 baby!!!!
I'm curious about the number of people travelling when you compare the old situation to the new: 6 car lanes vs 4 car lanes + 2 bike lanes.
You have that wrong. It went from 6 lanes for car travel to 2 lanes of car travel, 2 lanes of car parking, and 2 lanes of bicycles - and greatly reduced the speed cars were allowed to travel. If that road is carrying a quarter of the car traffic it used to I'll be surprised. Somehow I doubt the total car+bike trips matches the previous car only trips.
I wouldn't be surprised if the bike lanes allow for more people to travel through a given section at any one time. Car lanes have abysmal throughput.
@@TheFarix2723 In terms of maximum throughput yes, but the question is actual throughput. That is, a bicycle lane might be able to carry 80 people per minute at maximum flow rate but if actual use never exceeds 20 people per minute the rest of that maximum capacity is irrelevant.
Interesting video!
Although personally I'd much rather ride down a quiet side street than a busy main road. Sure, the quickest route possible would be nice, but less exhaust and noise is very much too. And there's no rule saying you can't have a quiet side streets that runs directly parallel to the busy direct main road, making them both pretty much equally direct.
Also quiet side streets have less red lights and stop signs, which makes biking even better!
Main roads offer the most design flexibility. Quiet side streets are often too narrow to build an effective bike corridor unless you're willing to completely remove cars or make the roadway a single car lane in one direction with the possibility of zero car parking. I'm obviously being simplistic but those kinds of proposals starts riots here in California.
Bike lanes are designed to optimise the time to a destination and minimise the risk of accident in a big city... roads with no bike is the opposite ... your comment does not help a city to get better but worst for cyclists to get respected . Be respectful , use bike lanes.
Optimise time to destination within a city; that argument has been used to justify any form of transport, and not only bicycles. The method of transport chosen is as cultural as it is of science or practicality. Any infrastructure can be overcrowded, as we see with car traffic. That has happened also with the bike, as seen in Utrecht. Too many people in too small a space, all with too little time. If the car and bike both don't make relief, what is the next choice?
Quiet side streets are often fairly safe to bike on already, without a need for bike paths. And can become safer with modal filtering to prevent car traffic from going through.
Also, whether you can have side streets parallel to the main road depends on how your streets were laid out. Often it's too late to have such streets, because it wasn't developed as a grid. Or you have such streets but they get blocked by odd block shapes every so often.
I swear you said, "Please *bike* and subscribe" at the end! 😆
Not at all surprised to see Dartmouth there as an example of a bad bike lane. I wish I could bike here without fearing that I'd be run over
Simple and effective solution.
Shaking and crying that you still haven't done a video covering Victoria and its incredible bike mode share.
Victoria would be fun to visit and make a video about. Let us know if you know any organization willing to fund a trip!
I thought you'd take the OhTheUrbanity private jet!
There's just one major barrier to building bike lanes: any attempt to remove car parking spaces or car lanes will inevitably be met with cries of "WAR ON CARS!!" from angry car-addicted suburbanites, most infamously the evil John Phillips of 790 KABC. You should hold a debate against him!
Considering the cyclists are subsidizing the suburbs AND all the asphalt the car people use and paying way more than their fair share of the overall infrastructure bills compared to usage, I think those people need to sit down and pipe down.
Shared on Mastodon ClimateJustice by JdeB 🇳🇱
Do you know if there are stats showing any change in bike theft rates where there are bike share programs?
1:36 looks so dangerous! I would only cycle on the far right there. Still, it's so much better than anything we have in my city.
I looked at this and felt safer than what we deal with now. Id rather someone whack me there and I fall onto sidewalk rather than into the path of a car. If I was riding that section I would be right of the lane like you expressed.
Yes it is very unsafe especially because in the exemple cyclists are trapped between a car parking and an elevated pathway.
Which means if a car opens a door or cross the line while parking, you don’t even have the option to turn to the side. You’re pretty much screwed in this tiny corridor of death.
I felt it was safer than being knocked under a bus. The lane looks like it was designed to be low cost but effective. I think they succeeded@@ombremad6951
Surely BIXI bike sharing system launching as early as 2009 must be a huge factor in reaching the bike cycling maturity reached by now. Would be fascinating to know more about how the bike cycling network is spreading out (or not?) in your own suburbian sprawl settings, a huge challenge imho.
What do you think of driving on roads together with cars? My city (tel aviv) has a very good and robust system of bike lanes, but I sometimes find myself biking on the road between cars especially on main streets, just because it's very fast, and given the way Street lights and turns work they will probably always be a few seconds faster, at least when the car road is in the middle of the street rather than on the side. I'm sure it's a bit more dangerous than biking on a bike lane, but I find it comfortable and also it has the benefit of making cars far slower on main roads, especially in commercial roads which cars have no business being in. Maybe cities should just give all roads inside a city a 30km speed limit and let cyclists on them, what do you think?
That would not be safe in most North American cities. Though some bicyclists ride with traffic here anyway even when there is a protected bike lane, drivers are not expecting it as they are in Tel Aviv. This is the same with lane filtering or splitting on motorcycles. When drivers are not accustomed to it, they are surprised and even angered, causing an unsafe situation for the cyclist.
@@charlienyc1 then just impose a very strict speed limit on all roads. People talk so much about how you can engineer enviroments to cause people to slow down in critical points, but you can just force them by law to slow down.
@@smorcrux426 Again, great in theory. However, in places where there is little to no traffic enforcement, speed limits (Audi stop signs and red lights) have little meaning.
Edit (The Original list wasn't a priority list):
[I would restructure the list at the end with different prioritys] I would give the points on the List the following prioritys:
1. #5 this isnthe Most important one, because without beiing Central through a neighbourhood there is less need for a Bike lane
2. #6 this one should bei the next priorty, If you only have one Bike lane you reach way less Destinations with the protection of a Bike lane
3. #4 this one is my third priority Just because it isnt AS important as #5 & #6 but those with lower prio have less Impact without it
4. #2 wide Bike lanes are the easiest Form of protection, If a Car does Something stupid, you'll have a way better Chance to evade it, and having Them wide isnt realy expansive
5. #3 arent Always possible but are a nice to have at this point
6. #7 its good to dont prioritise this one to much or it'll be used against bikelanes in already build non dense areas
7. #1 this is a Bit Luxus, i dont think it is as usefull as portraied
8. #8 yes but it will come on its one If the Rest is there
The list wasn't ordered according to priority, it was ordered from the details about the lane, then the route, then the network, and then other factors about the urban environment.
@@OhTheUrbanity Oh, thanks for the response. In that case it makes sense.
I use my Gazelle ebike and citi bike in NYC.
Good choice, a well established firm since 1892 in the Netherlands, great quality bicycles 😊
One of the problems of St-Denis street cycling path (and all others in Montréal) is that it ends abruptly, and you are basicly thrown back into 4 lanes of car traffic without notice or escape routes. The REV needs improvement. Bellechase is great, but sees less bike traffic compared to Rachel street 2 block down. And Rachel cycling path is a nightmare of potholes.
What do you mean by this? At the north of the island it connects to a bike path into Laval (which, granted, doesn't have as good of a network yet). At the south it connects to Berri. The connection used to be a little substandard (requiring 120 metres of cycling on a painted bike lane on Roy to get to Berri) but around September they extended Saint-Denis with regular concrete separation past Des Pins, around Cherrier, and to the Berri hill.
@@OhTheUrbanity Great! Last time I went there was in the summer, glad to hear it has changed since then.
I am glad bike lines are getting more wider since covid. I dont have car since pandemic, I bought e-bike and happily reach 7000 km.Almost free transportation plus doing my exercises for 6 months at least .
I feel more harassment from drivers since more roads from bikers. I just had an argument with driver so I want to ask someone h about the Montreal rules.
So I was turning left from Decarie Blvd to Sainte Croix Av, right in front of Starbucks corner. There are lights at the intersection . Should I keep right and than make left turn? I know I am able to make direct left if there is lights on intersection. Please inform me.
I get curious about mode share between bicycling and driving cars on a street. One reason for building a bike lane is to relieve car congestion. But are people actually switching from driving to riding bikes? This might happen with individuals starting their travel career driving, then biking instead. It might be generational, where the children of drivers prefer bicylcling. And it could come about with demographic shifts within a neighbourhood. Or it might be overall trends across a nation. Across North America bicycle mode share has been very consistent from one town to the next, one neighbourhood to the next. As they say, everyone says they want to do their own things but actually do very similar things.
How do these trends affect cycling advocacy?
Haven't watched all of it yet, but the first point you make about winter cycling increasing, I'd honestly peg that to the later and later dates of snow we're having in Ottawa/MTL each year as climate change ravages our nation. Ironically, bike lanes could be our saving grace if implemented globally.
If bicycling was the main form of transportation, people will be healthier and medical care costs will decrease substantially. Once the benefit of cycling is fully realized, everyone would use cycling instead of driving.
I'm glad to watch a video focusing on the positive improvements recently made in Montreal and how to apply the experience elsewhere.
I just watched Not Just Bikes video about Montreal urbanism and cycling infrastructure and it actually made me angry. Not because it think Montreal is perfect and shouldn't be criticized but because the overall tone was "Well it's not Amsterdam or Dutch, so actually it's shit and don't bother".
It’s not what it’s saying. Tbh I think it fairly describes why and how it is indeed still shit.
He's always driving the point that Amsterdam was shit before and that they managed to improve so I don't think he thinks that for Montreal or anywhere. I didn't get that vibe either.
He neglected to mention that the 8km distance he talked about is literally the diameter of Amsterdam.
Go figure, make a bike lane clearly safer than riding on the street and provide direct connections to places people want to go and it becomes a success! In most of North America I'd say that traffic filters and short-cuts stitching together calm side streets is the cheapest way to do this, but I won't say no to protected bike lanes. Madison Wisconsin between the lakes lucked into this development pattern.
I'd add to your list that they are not "shared paths", shared with pedestrians. In Australia, most off-road cycleways such as converted rail corridors, and many road-side cycleways, are "shared paths" shared with pedestrians, skaters, etc and you never know when you're going to come across three or more pedestrians walking side-by-side or a middle-aged Karen doing 50km/h on an e-bike while veering all over the place.
Here in New Orleans the city has been building a bicycle network but it's just totally pathetic compared to Montreal. There are only 3 decent bike corridors: Lafitte Greenway, Norman C Francis Pkwy, and Saint Anthony Street in the outer Gentilly.
"Imagine if you had a subway line that didn't connect you to anything"
I don't have to imagine, I have the Baltimore Metro
I agree that this is one of the best additions to the Montreal bike system.
However in the warmer weather St Denis is pedestrian only from Ontario St to St Catherine. Cyclist are supposed to dismount.
Unfortunately very few of them do that and most don't even slow down despite very clear signage.
It's only a few blocks and there are alternative routes.
This reflects poorly on all cyclists.
I am convinced its the tulips that determend the succes of this bike path
As a European it look dangerous. Normally the bike line is integrated into the sidewalk, and in crossroads,. there are "speed bumps" to force the car to slow down.
Another point that needs to be said is that the parking protection can't be broken up by Curb cuts every 50 ft. I feel like Planners and advocates are a little blind to that
Here in Southern California, bike lanes like that just get filled with broken glass and trash.
Interesting to see just how neglected Cotes-de-neiges and NDG are by city Hall. Does anyone know why? Was Sue Montgomery not in with the cool kids around Valerie, as i suspect? Is this going to be rectified in 2027?
There are many places in the United States with good weather all year round that have single family homes connected with a network of stroads. In these places the biggest stumbling block to better bicycle infrastructure is not population density, but attitudes about cycling. Typically, the same people are against increasing population density anyway. These large swaths of land are not practical to avoid by taking a different bicycle route. It makes it hard to get from here to there, literally and figuratively.
I'm calling you out as a (fellow) CityNerd viewer 😊
@@charlienyc1 yeh, it did kind of sound like City Nerd.😀
@@barryrobbins7694 Where else do you hear the term 'stroad'?
@@charlienyc1 It is a common term among urbanists on UA-cam.
@@barryrobbins7694 Ah, good point. I suppose I should be watching others besides these two.
Interesting that you peg unidirectional as one of the factors of success. I know it's the current best practice, but I actually prefer what Montreal's bidirectional routes do to the feel of the city, over Toronto's near-exclusive use of unidirectional
Bidirectional pools the cyclists in one area, taking up more visible road space and making the lanes look busier than one direction can at a time
Bidirectional also effectively legalizes "going the wrong way" for delivery people and makes it easier to turn around
The strategic use of contra-flow bike lanes can be used to address your last point.
One of the "guerrilla" bike lanes I am aware of in Edmonton: that stuck around, and is now maintained by the city, was a contra-flow bike lane out of the university area. The area has a bunch of one-way streets to discourage motorists from making short-cuts (by taking a round-about route to get out).
A bike lane should NEVER run parallel with a street, neither a reserved lane nor its own pavement, neither behind not before parking cars. The problem is at the next crossing where cars turn right and bikes are simply too fast, especially e-Bikes and racing and have green light at the same time
A much better arrangment is: every second road is only for bikes (and parking of cars if space is plenty) the others only for cars, no bike lanes in parallel, only accesible by bike to reach shops or homes. The crossings with traffic lights or even bridge/tunnel.
That seems needlessly complex and hard to implement compared to just having separate bike signals and right turning signals for cars. Has any large city ever implemented your proposal?
@@OhTheUrbanity Not a complete city, but we do have bike lanes here that route different from streets, behind the buildings on the garden side, and they do well. Silent, no stress, even for people that live there, people walk and bikes go both directions, and at the crossing with streets they have traffic lights, I never heared of any accident. In established cities with rectangular streets this can be implemented by giving every second street to bikes and pedestrians, café on the boardwalk, some parking for residents but for cars a dead end. Only every second street remains for cars.
Here in Montreal, many of the «ruelles» or alley ways behind houses, are used in the way you describe; used as a parallel bike lane for low-speed car traffic, parking and/or bike lane and pedestrian walking area. You can go several blocks on these « ruelles» and avoid using the street or the REV or any other bike infrastructure. Is this similar to the idea that you are trying to describe ? If so, I think that, in many parts of Montreal, this system already exists, but only un-offically, in practice, but not really planned as your system... «every second road is only for bikes (and parking of cars....»).
@@OhTheUrbanity Here in Montreal, many of the «ruelles» or alley ways behind houses, are used in the way you describe; used as a parallel bike lane for low-speed car traffic, parking and/or bike lane and pedestrian walking area. You can go several blocks on these « ruelles» and avoid using the street or the REV or any other bike infrastructure. In many parts of Montreal, this system already exists.....
@@dcb8531 Sounds similar, I tried to look it up on Google Maps, but the ruelles seem short, and mostly dead ends even for pedestrians, we have these ways across the whole town (which is not very large, just 5 blocks) and connected outside into forests or industrial areas.
Its disappointing that the plan for the Jean Talon REV isn't direct like a REV route should be
Bikeshare programs are a system with limited returns, so I am not sure I would include #8 on your list. The issue with bikeshare is that all the bikes people use clutter up certain spots and need to be taken back to other places where they can be picked up. The bigger this program grows, the more 'bike relocation trucks' you'll have driving around your city, and the more common it becomes for people to come across a place with no bikes. As such, bikeshares are a good thing to kick things off, but once you've got success, you'll actually want to remove them as all the time, space and money spent on keeping the system operational is counter-productive.
Do you have an example of a city that used bike share to "kick things off" but then eliminated their system when it got too big?
that's why as the system grows it gets more revenue to higher more trucks and staff and become better to attract other sources of finance like advertisement.
@@OhTheUrbanity I'm afraid I don't have an example of a city that used it to 'kick it off'. I'm pretty sure one exists since I saw it mentioned in either video or an article, but in the meanwhile, the best I can quickly find are references to Amsterdam (narrow streets and bike shares taking up valuable space native bikes could use).
The problem with 'getting more trucks and scaling up' is that those trucks will themselves clog up traffic all around the city, which is the problem that using bikes is meant to fix to begin with.
@@Aviertje Do you live in a city that has bike share? In our city, rebalancing trucks are something you see every once in a while, but they don't have a big presence and I don't have any worries about them filling up the streets in the foreseeable future.